
    CALABRO v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    June 29, 1922.)
    No. 2886.
    Criminal law @=>594(3)—Judgment not reversed for denial of continuance, when It does not appear defendant failed to obtain witnesses who would have testified in his favor.
    A judgment will not be reversed, for denial of a continuance asked for on the ground of want of time to prepare, where it does not appear that defendant had any witnesses who could not be obtained within the time allowed, or who would have testified in his favor.
    In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; Oliver B. Dickinson, Judge.
    Albert Calabro was convicted of illegal possession and sale of narcotic drugs, and he brings error.
    Affirmed.
    Michael A. Spatola, of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff in error.
    Robert V. Bolger, of Philadelphia, Pa., for the United States.
    Before BUFFINGTON, WOOEEEY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
   WOOLEEY, Circuit Judge.

This case is here on the record in Paoni and Smith v. United States, 281 Fed. 801, just decided, and differs from that case in only one circumstance, yet in the vital circumstance that the defendant has failed, to show that he had any witnesses who, had they been summoned, would have testified in his favor, or any witnesses who could not, within the time limited by the trial court, be obtained by compulsory process. In other words the defendant, failing to show that he was prejudiced by the action of the trial court, raises on this writ of error an academic rather than a substantial question. Therefore the judgment below must be affirmed. 
      t§s»For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in .all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
     