Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

409 F.2d 839

Docket No. 22491.

Quintero v. United States

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided April 11, 1969.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1969-04-11

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 1973

3 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Ramirez v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1969-04-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*840James A. Wallace, of Rivera & Wallace, Beverly Hills, Cal., for appellant.

¶2Wm. Matthew Byrne, Jr., U. S. Atty./ Robert L. Brosio, Asst. U. S. Atty., Crim. Div., Howard B. Frank, Asst. U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

¶3Before CHAMBERS, JERTBERG and KOELSCH, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM:

¶5Quintero was convicted on three counts involving the importation and transportation of untaxed heroin. We affirm.

¶6The evidence was sufficient. This is a much stronger case than Ramirez v. United States, 9 Cir., 363 F.2d 33, upon which Quintero relies. Here there were act, word and conduct on the part of Quintero which were found wanting in Ramirez.

¶7A contention was and is made by Quintero that Galindo, a joint actor, did not properly waive his Fifth Amendment rights when he testified. We cannot agree. If Galindo had been believed, his testimony was all favorable to Quintero. Furthermore, Galindo’s privilege was not Quintero’s.

/409/f2d/839 · .json · Public domain