Case ID: a2d_157/html/0626-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Emanuel M. ARNOLD, Appellant, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee.
    Nos. 2466 and 2467.
    Municipal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
    Argued Nov. 9, 1959.
    Decided Feb. 2, 1960.
    Rehearing Denied Feb. 17, 1960.
    Mark P. Friedlander, Jr., Washington, D. C., with whom Mark P. Friedlander and Blaine P. Friedlander, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellant.
    Ted D. Kuemmerling, Asst. Corp. Counsel, Washington, D. C., with whom Chester H. Gray, Corp. Counsel, Milton D. Korman, Principal Asst. Corp. Counsel, and Hubert B. Pair, Asst. Corp. Counsel, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellee.
    Before ROVER, Chief Judge, and HOOD and QUINN, Associate Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of “colliding” and of “leaving after colliding” in violation of the Traffic and Motor Vehicle Regulations. '

His contention on this appeal is that the court improperly limited his counsel in his cross-examination of the government’s witnesses.

We have carefully examined the record and cannot say there was any abuse of discretion in this connection.

Affirmed.