Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Whitley v. United States

October 25, 2001

WILLIAM A. WHITLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES, APPELLEE.



Before Schwelb and Washington, Associate Judges, and Nebeker, Senior Judge.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Schwelb, Associate Judge

As amended April 10, 2002. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied.

WILLIAM A. WHITLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES, APPELLEE.

Peter L. Goldman, appointed by this court, filed a brief for appellant. Kenneth L. Wainstein, United States Attorney at the time the brief was filed, and John R. Fisher and Bernard J. Delia, Assistant United States Attorneys, filed a brief for appellee.

Before Schwelb and Washington, Associate Judges, and Nebeker, Senior Judge.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Schwelb, Associate Judge

 Appeals from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia Hon. Mary Ellen Abrecht, Trial Judge

Submitted October 11, 2001

On July 14, 1997, William A. Whitley was convicted by a jury of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute it (PWID), in violation of D.C. Code § 33-541 (a)(1) (1998). *fn1 On the same day, the trial judge found Whitley guilty of unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia (PDP), in violation of D.C. Code § 33-603 (a) (1998). *fn2 On September 9, 1999, Whitley filed a motion for a new trial on the grounds that the prosecution's narcotics expert, Detective Johnny St. Valentine Brown, Jr., of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), had given perjured testimony at Whitley's trial regarding his (Brown's) credentials. On April 24, 2000, in a seven-page written order, the trial judge denied Whitley's motion without a hearing.

Whitley filed timely appeals from his convictions and from the order denying his motion for a new trial. These appeals were consolidated by order of this court. Only the appeal from the order denying Whitley's post-trial motion merits plenary discussion; we affirm that order as well as Whitley's convictions. *fn3

I.

THE TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS

A. The evidence.

In her order denying Whitley's motion for a new trial, the trial judge succinctly summarized the evidence at the trial. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.