Michael Anthony Davis v. United States

Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted in a jury trial of violating 18 U. S.C. § 914 and 18 U.S.C. § 1708 . He appeals from his judgment of conviction on each count. We affirm.

Appellant assigns two errors:

I.

MIRANDA WARNING

Appellant received and signed a warning card, patterned to conform to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). He complains of the language: “* * * anything you say can be used against you in court.”, and argues that the language should be: “* * * anything you say can and will be used against you in court.” This contention is patently without merit. Craft v. United States, 403 F.2d 360 (9th Cir. 1968).

II.

EYE-WITNESS IDENTIFICATION

While we do not condone the practice, followed in this case, of attempting to influence a witness’s recollection by displaying to her a photograph. of appellant immediately prior to testifying, we hold that the admission of the identification testimony on the record before us, did not, in any way, affect the substantial rights of the appellant.

The witness had an excellent chance to closely observe the person who committed the crimes and there is nothing in the record which even…