United States v. Bratton, 95-50487 (1996)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 95-50487
Visitors: 20
Filed: Feb. 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50487 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus EDWARD M. BRATTON, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-94-CR-151-1 - January 4, 1996 Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Edward M. Bratton appeals his conviction for simple assault in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(e). Bratton argues that the evidence
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50487 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus EDWARD M. BRATTON, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-94-CR-151-1 - January 4, 1996 Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Edward M. Bratton appeals his conviction for simple assault in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(e). Bratton argues that the evidence ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-50487
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
EDWARD M. BRATTON,
Defendant-Appellant.
----------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-94-CR-151-1
----------
January 4, 1996
Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Edward M. Bratton appeals his conviction for simple assault in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 113(e). Bratton argues that the evidence was insufficient to show that Robert J. Schildt
reasonably feared immediate bodily harm or that Bratton did not act in self-defense.
We have reviewed the record and the briefs and find no reversible error. There is
substantial evidence to support a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt that Bratton's threat
caused Schildt reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm and Bratton did not act in self-
defense.
Bratton's conviction is AFFIRMED.
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
Source: CourtListener