Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frederick Freeman DARSEY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1970-08-20
Citations: 431 F.2d 963
Docket Number: No. 28507
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frederick Freeman DARSEY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 431
Pages: 963–965

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frederick Freeman DARSEY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 28507.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit,
Aug. 20, 1970.
Wisdom, Circuit Judge, dissented in part, concurred in part, and filed opinion.
John C. Ciolino, New Orleans, La. (court appointed), for defendant-appellant.
John L. Briggs, U. S. Atty., Bernard H. Dempsey, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Oscar Blasingame, Asst. U. S. Atty., Tampa, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before JONES, WISDOM and COLEMAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The appellant, Frederick Freeman Darsey, was charged by a 4-eount indictment with violations of 47 U.S.C.A. § 223. The first two counts charged the use of obscene language in interstate telephone calls and the third and fourth counts charged him with the making of interstate telephone calls for the purpose of harassment. Darsey was tried before the court without a jury. He was found guilty of the charges contained in counts 1, 2 and 4 of the indictment and found not guilty of the charge contained in count 3 of the indictment. He was sentenced to six months' imprisonment on each of the three counts of which he had been convicted, with the sentences to run consecutively. The principal contentions made on appeal are that the language which the appellant used was not in violation of the statute under counts 1 and 2 and was not nor intended to be harassment as charged in count 4. We find no error in the district court's determination of guilt. The other question raised on the appeal is wholly without merit. The judgment and sentence of the district court is
Affirmed.
. "Whoever—
(1) in the District of Columbia or in interstate or foreign communication by means of telephone—
(A) makes any comment, request, suggestion or proposal which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent ;
(B) makes a telephone call, whether or not conversation ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number;
(C) makes or causes the telephone of another repeatedly or continuously to ring, with intent to harass any person at the called number; or
(D) makes repeated telephone calls, during which conversation ensues, solely to harass any person at the called number ; or
❖ shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than six months, or both."