UNITED STATES

v.

DARBY

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1985)
  …ion of the Court.” The note of the Advisory Committee to Rule 52(b) reads as follows: “This rule is a restatement of existing law, Wiborg v. United States, 163 U. S. 632, 658 . . . ; Hemphill v. United States, 112 F. 2d 505, C. C. A. 9th, reversed 312 U. S. 657, . . . conformed to 120 F. 2d 115, certiorari denied 314 U. S. 627 .... Rule 27 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, 28 U. S. C. foil. § 354, provides that errors not specified will be disregarded, 'save as the court, at its option, may notice a plain…
• Miller v. United States, 317 U.S. 192 (U.S. 1942)
  …123 F. 2d 715. 124 F. 2d 849. 126 F. 2d 462. 28 U. S. C. § 832. 9 Comp. Gen. 503; Gf. 21 Comp. Gen. 347. 18 U. S. C. A. § 688ff. Bay v. United States, 301 U. S. 158, 164, 167; Holmes v. United States, 314 U. S. 583. Hemphill v. United States, 312 U. S. 657.…
• Cephus v. United States, 324 F.2d 893 (D.C. Cir. 1963)
  …ther a final decision appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1958), nor, of course, an interlocutory decision appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1958). . We read the Government’s concession and the Supreme Court’s decision in Hemphill v. United States, 312 U.S. 657, 61 S.Ct. 729, 85 L.Ed. 1106 (1941) (per curiam), and Rule 52(b), F.R.Crim.P., as repudiating the notion that renewal of the motion at the end of the case is necessary to gain appellate review of the suf [*896] ficiency of the evidence. Onr referenc…

  ← 1 / 2 →