UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
SALVADOR G. SANTOS AND VALERIO SANTOS, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

5th Cir. | 1973-07-09
No. 73-1101
483 F.2d 35 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1973) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellants and that the trial court did not commit plain error by failing to give a cautionary instruction.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellants were convicted of various violations of the Gun Control Act of 1968. They appealed, arguing insufficient evidence and plain error regarding…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Valerio and Salvador Santos appeal from their conviction of various violations of the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C.A. § 922. We affirm.

Appellants’ main contention is that there was not sufficient evidence to convict them on each count of the sixteen count indictment.1 Our review of the record convinces us that this is not true.

Appellants also contend that it was plain error for the court to fail to give a cautionary instruction as to the weight to be accorded the testimony of an accomplice without a request for such an instruction or an objection to the court’s failure to give it. The answer to this contention is that the government did not rely on accomplices’ testimony. The witnesses for the government may have violated Title 18, U.S.C., Section 922(a), by acquiring or assisting other purchasers to acquire weapons but each of the substantive counts, Count I through Count XV, inclusive, charged the appellants with offenses as firearms dealers in violation of Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 922(b)(3), 922(b)(5) and 922(m). If the testimony had been offered in proof of the charges against the purchasers, a cautionary instruction as to the weight to be afforded accomplices’ testimony would have been appropriate. It was clearly not called for in the circumstances present here, where none of the government witnesses knowingly corroborated with or aided or abetted either appellant. As to Count XVI, the conspiracy count, there was no evidence that any government witness was a co-conspirator or collaborated in the violations of the Firearms Act by the appellants.

Affirmed.

. Valerio Santos is charged with twelve substantive counts. Salvador Santos is charged with three substantive counts. Both appellants are charged in the sixteenth count of the indictment as co-conspirators.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw