DocketNumber: No. 3849
Judges: Hood, Myers, Quinn
Filed Date: 5/12/1966
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/26/2024
This is an appeal from a conviction for indecent exposure under Code 1961, § 22-1112. Appellant argues that the government failed to establish the corpus delicti in that there was no corroboration of the arresting officer’s testimony, and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the judgment.
Appellant was initially tried and convicted in 1963, but on appeal we reversed with instructions to grant a new trial because of a procedural error below.
In the past, we have refused to extend the Kelly doctrine to cases involving soliciting for prostitution,
Appellant next contends that the arresting officer’s testimony at the second trial varied materially from that at the first, and that the evidence was therefore insufficient to support the judgment of conviction. After reviewing the record, we are of the opinion that the variations involved were of a kind likely to occur when trials are separated by a span of two years, that they were not material, and that the trial judge could, without reasonable doubt, rule as he did. We find no reversible error in his decision.
Affirmed.
. Nassif v. District of Columbia, D.C.App., 201 A.2d 519 (1964).
. Price v. United States, D.C.Mun.App., 135 A.2d 854 (1957).
. McGhee v. District of Columbia, D.C.Mun.App., 137 A.2d 721 (1958).
. Haynes v. District of Columbia, D.C.App., 204 A.2d 574 (1964).
. Guarro v. United States, 99 U.S.App.D.C. 97, 98, 237 F.2d 578, 579 (1956).