General
SENICK v. UNITED STATES
271 F. 918·United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·1921
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
SENICK v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
February 17, 1921.)
No. 1862.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond; Edmund Waddill, Jr., Judge.
Frank Senick was convicted of violating Harrison Narcotic Act, § 1, as amended by Revenue Act 1918, § 1006 (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1919, § 6287g), and he brings error.
Affirmed.
R. T. Thorp and J. L. Broudy, both of Norfolk, Va., for plaintiff in error.
Hiram M. Smith, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., of Richmond, Va.
Before KNAPP and WOODS, Circuit Judges, and ROSE, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
In so far as the questions which the plaintiff in error seeks here to raise are of substance, they have been answered adversely to his contentions by our opinion in Pierriero v. United States, 271 Fed. 912, handed down at this term.
Affirmed-