ANGEL MORA ZARAGOZA, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the presumption portion of 21 U.S.C.A. § 176a is constitutional, and that other issues were not preserved for appeal.
Appellant was charged with and found guilty of three counts related to marijuana offenses. He appealed his conviction, raising several points of error…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Presumption Of Constitutionality cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Appellant was charged in Counts IV, V and VI of a six count indictment with (a) concealing and transporting, (b) selling and (c) illegally transferring marijuana. A codefendant was charged alone in Counts I, II and III, and jointly in Counts IV, V and VI. The codefendant Rivera was found guilty on all counts. The appellant was found guilty on three counts, and received an eight year sentence on each count, to run concurrently.
Five errors are urged. Four of them relating to severance, claim of immunity, failure to instruct on entrapment as to Counts IV, V and VI, and unreasonable search, were never raised at the trial court level. No motion of acquittal was urged on behalf of this defendant during the trial. Not only was the record not made, there is no substance or merit in any of these points.
Appellant’s “main point” is tie unconstitutionality of the presumption portion of 21 U.S.C.A. § 176a.
We have repeatedly held it constitutional, and have declined to overrule such previous decisions. Caudillo v. United States, 253 F. 2d 513 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Romero v. United States, 357 U.S. 931, 78 S.Ct. 1375, 2 L.Ed.2d 1373 (1958); Jefferson v. United States, 340 F. 2d 194 (9th Cir. 1965). As to other circuits, see Borne v. United States, 332 F. 2d 565 (5th Cir. 1964); Robinson v. United States, 327 F. 2d 618 (8th Cir. 1964); Toy v. United States, 266 F. 326 (2d Cir. 1920).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ambrose Badillo Caudillo v. United States, 253 F.2d 513 (9th Cir. 1958)
- Carroll Robinson v. United States, 327 F.2d 618 (8th Cir. 1964)
- Allen v. Murphy, 357 U.S. 931 (U.S. 1958)
- B & G Elec. Co. v. G. E. Bass & Co., Inc., 357 U.S. 931 (U.S. 1958)
- Borne v. United States, 332 F.2d 565 (5th Cir. 1964)