Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Norman Curtis Edgington v. United States, 324 F.2d 491, 10th Cir. (1963)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed the conviction of Norman Curtis Edgington for a criminal offense under New Mexico law. The Court found that Edgington was denied a fair trial due to prejudicial remarks made by both the prosecuting attorney, who repeatedly projected himself personally into the trial events, and the trial court judge, who engaged in a personal colloquy with the defendant on one occasion. Although Edgington did not object to the conduct at trial, the Court determined it clearly resulted in prejudice against Edgington. The case was remanded for a new trial.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Norman Curtis Edgington v. United States, 324 F.2d 491, 10th Cir. (1963)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views1 page
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed the conviction of Norman Curtis Edgington for a criminal offense under New Mexico law. The Court found that Edgington was denied a fair trial due to prejudicial remarks made by both the prosecuting attorney, who repeatedly projected himself personally into the trial events, and the trial court judge, who engaged in a personal colloquy with the defendant on one occasion. Although Edgington did not object to the conduct at trial, the Court determined it clearly resulted in prejudice against Edgington. The case was remanded for a new trial.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1963-11-19 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 324 F.2d 491 Docket: 7354_1

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed the conviction of Norman Curtis Edgington for a criminal offense under New Mexico law. The Court found that Edgington was denied a fair trial due to prejudicial remarks made by both the prosecuting attorney, who repeatedly projected himself personally into the trial events, and the trial court judge, who engaged in a personal colloquy with the defendant on one occasion. Although Edgington did not object to the conduct at trial, the Court determined it clearly resulted in prejudice against Edgington. The case was remanded for a new trial.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    8 views1 page

    Norman Curtis Edgington v. United States, 324 F.2d 491, 10th Cir. (1963)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed the conviction of Norman Curtis Edgington for a criminal offense under New Mexico law. The Court found that Edgington was denied a fair trial due to prejudicial remarks made by both the prosecuting attorney, who repeatedly projected himself personally into the trial events, and the trial court judge, who engaged in a personal colloquy with the defendant on one occasion. Although Edgington did not object to the conduct at trial, the Court determined it clearly resulted in prejudice against Edgington. The case was remanded for a new trial.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 1

    324 F.

    2d 491

    Norman Curtis EDGINGTON, Appellant,


    v.
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
    No. 7354.

    United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.


    Nov. 19, 1963.

    L. R. Sutin and Edward L. Yudin, Albuquerque, N.M., for appellant.


    L. D. Harris, Asst. U.S. Atty. (John Quinn, U.S. Atty., was with him on
    the brief), for appellee.
    Before PICKETT, LEWIS and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM.

    Appellant was convicted of a criminal offense designated under Section 40-3421, New Mexico Statutes Annotated, 1953 Comp., and made cognizable as a
    federal offense by 18 U.S.C.A. 1152. He appeals asserting, among other things,
    that he was prejudiced at the trial below by remarks made by both the trial
    court and the prosecuting attorney.

    An examination of the record reveals that the prosecuting attorney repeatedly


    projected himself personally into the trial events and that upon one occasion the
    trial court engaged in a colloquy with the defendant upon a personal basis.
    Although appellant failed to make timely objection to the conduct of the
    prosecutor or to the remarks of the court we think it clear that prejudice
    resulted and denied appellant his right to a fair and impartial trial.

    The judgment is reversed with directions to grant appellant a new trial.

    You might also like