PER CURIAM.
The defendant was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 2113(a) and (d). He contends on appeal that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain his conviction and that the trial court abused its discretion in permitting an overly broad cross-examination of a defense witness who testified that the defendant had not participated in the robbery.
We conclude from a careful examination of the record that there is no merit to either of the...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
