United States v. Weeks
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
919 F.2d 248 (1990)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Danny Weeks (defendant) was charged with kidnapping, interstate transportation of a stolen vehicle, carrying a firearm during a violent crime, and possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. During Weeks’s trial in a federal district court, the prosecution showed a firearm to the jury. It was not the firearm used by Weeks. It belonged to a government firearms expert and was identified by a kidnap victim as being similar to the firearm Weeks took from the trunk of her car and used in the charged offenses. The firearm was not admitted into evidence and not included in the jury’s deliberation materials; it was merely shown to the jury during the prosecution’s argument to illustrate witness testimony regarding Weeks’s conduct. Further, the judge expressly reiterated to the jury that the gun was merely a model of the one allegedly used by Weeks. Nevertheless, Weeks objected to the prosecution’s display of the gun. His attorney also argued the display was purposefully inflammatory because the prosecution clicked the gun while walking toward the witness. The prosecution countered that the gun’s barrel had been open and merely closed as he walked. The district judge overruled the objections, and the jury ultimately convicted Weeks. Weeks appealed, again contesting the prosecution’s display of the firearm.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 911,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 997 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

