ALM

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

• United States v. Marx, 485 F.2d 1179 (10th Cir. 1973)
  …banking purposes, and thus not until Marx forcefully took it from him did the Bank lose possession and control. Appellants were therefore properly convicted of bank robbery. See United States v. Jakalski, 237 F. 2d 503 (7th Cir. 1956), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 939, 77 S.Ct. 817, 1 L.Ed.2d 761; Rumfelt v. United States, 445 F. 2d 134 (7th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 853, 92 S.Ct. 92, 30 L.Ed.2d 94. Marx argues the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on appellant Shriver’s theory of defen…
• United States v. Giuliano, 263 F.2d 582 (3d Cir. 1959)
  …d it does establish a case from which the jury can find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Holland v. United States, 1954, 348 U.S. 121, 75 S.Ct. 127, 99 L.Ed. 150; United States v. Allard, 3 Cir., 240 F. 2d 840, certiorari denied 1957, 353 U.S. 939. Appellant asserts that the instant case, in regard to the conspiracy charge, is governed by the principle of United States v. Falcone, 1940, 311 U.S. 205, 61 S.Ct. 204, 85 L.Ed. 128, and United States v. Gerke, 3 Cir., 125 F. 2d 243, certiorari de…
• United States v. Leon, 739 F.2d 885 (3d Cir. 1984)
  …does not need to be inconsistent with every conclusion save that of guilt if it does establish a case from which the jury can find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Allard, 240 F. 2d 840, 841 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 939, 77 S.Ct. 814, 1 L.Ed.2d 761 (1957). See also United States v. Cooper, 567 F. 2d 252, 253 (3d Cir.1977) (recognizing the Glasser and Allard standards). Finally, when examining the sufficiency of the evidence, the court reviews the totality of the c…