TOMLEY

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Lawson, 507 F.2d 433 (7th Cir. 1974)
  …through the motions of complying with the requirement of “stating distinctly the matter to which he objects and the grounds of his objection.” Rule 30. (Emphasis added.) In Tomley v. United States, 250 F. 2d 549, 551 (5th Cir. 1957), cert. denied, 356 U.S. 928, 78 S.Ct. 116, 2 L.Ed.2d 759 (1958), the court dealt with a similarly cursory obeisance to the Rule as follows: “In his objection, counsel for defendant merely restated his requests, but did not even attempt to give the grounds for his complaint th…
• Odell Clark v. United States, 293 F.2d 445 (5th Cir. 1961)
  …ion for acquittal, the circumstances here are such as fully warrant a review of the evidence under the plain error rule. See Meeks v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 259 F. 2d 328; Tomley v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 250 F. 2d 549, certiorari denied 356 U.S. 928, 78 S.Ct. 716, 2 L.Ed.2d 759; Demos v. United States, 5 Cir., 1953, 205 F. 2d 596, certiorari denied 346 U.S. 873, 74 S.Ct. 123, 98 L.Ed. 382; Thomas v. United States, 5 Cir., 1951, 189 F. 2d 430; Ansley v. United States, 5 Cir., 1943, 135 F. 2d 207…
• Friedman v. United States, 381 F.2d 155 (8th Cir. 1967)
  …Appellant’s objection or exception failed utterly to comply with that rule. There was complete failure to point out why appellant believed the instruction “not proper law”. In Tomley v. United States, 5 Cir., 1957, 250 F. 2d 549, certiorari denied, 356 U.S. 928, 78 S.Ct. 716, 2 L.Ed. 2d 759, the court, when faced with a similar problem, stated at pages 550-551 of 250 F. 2d: “ * * * Under that rule, [Rule 30, supra] in order to put the trial court in error, it is necessary that the defendant precisely stat…