BERRY

v.

NEW YORK

Citator

Cited By

• The United States v. Miller, 460 F.2d 582 (10th Cir. 1972)
  …timony of the co-defendants would be damaging to the appellants. Counsel for the appellants objected. The Court instructed the prosecutor to cease with this argument. In Smith v. United States, 119 U.S.App.D.C. 22, 336 F. 2d 941 (1964), cert. denied 385 U.S. 1017, 87 S.Ct. 736, 17 L.Ed.2d 554 (1967), a similar incident occurred. There the Court held that timely and forceful intervention by the trial court negated prejudicial error. That rule applies here. Bailey v. United States, 410 F. 2d 1209 (10th Cir. 19…
• United States v. Smith, 436 F.2d 787 (5th Cir. 1971)
  …ructed the jury not to consider it. Even when the argument was, as here, improper, the prompt corrective instruction ensured that the jury would disregard it. Smith v. United States, 1964, 119 U.S.App.D.C. 22, 336 F. 2d 941, 942, cert. denied, 1967, 385 U.S. 1017, 87 S.Ct. 736, 17 L.Ed.2d 554; see French v. United States, 5 Cir. 1956, 232 F. 2d 736, 740, cert. denied, 352 U.S. 851, 77 S.Ct. 73, 1 L.Ed.2d 62. Smith had a full and fair trial. There was no error. The judgment of conviction is Affirmed.…
• United States v. Dailey, 524 F.2d 911 (8th Cir. 1975)
  …knew it would not. See United States v. Miller, 460 F. 2d 582, 588 (10th Cir. 1972); Bradley v. United States, 136 U.S.App.D.C. 339, 420 F. 2d 181, 185-187 (1969); Smith v. United States, 119 U.S.App.D.C. 22, 336 F. 2d 941, 942 (1964), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1017, 87 S.Ct. 736, 17 L.Ed.2d 554 (1967). In this case, as in United States v. Achtenberg, 459 F. 2d 91, 98-99 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 932, 93 S.Ct. 229, 34 L.Ed.2d 187 (1972), the prosecutor deliberately misled the jury in a close case, and…