Lawrence v. United States, 196 F.2d 48 (D.C. Cir. 1952)
Annotate this CaseDecided April 10, 1952
Writ of Certiorari Denied June 9, 1952
See 72 S. Ct. 1082
Albert A. Stern, Washington, D. C., for appellant.
Lewis A. Carroll, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., with whom Charles M. Irelan, U. S. Atty., Robert M. Scott and Joseph M. Howard, Asst. U. S. Attys., all of Washington, D. C., were on the briefs, for appellee.
George Morris Fay, U. S. Atty., when the record was filed, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, PROCTOR, and FAHY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
In each of these cases appellant was convicted of robbery and the District Court declined to grant a new trial. In each case appellant's motion for a new trial was based on newly discovered evidence that a prosecution witness had a criminal record. It may fairly be said that with regard to the character of this witness as revealed by evidence at each of appellant's trials the criminal record of the witness was merely cumulative. Moreover her testimony regarding appellant's connection with the crimes of which he was convicted was itself merely cumulative. The court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial. Brown v. United States, 59 App.D.C. 57, 32 F.2d 953.
Affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
