¶1Henry Florence (argued) Karl N. Stewart, Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant-appellant.
¶2Joe Jenckes (argued), Asst. U. S. Atty., Philip Malinsky, Asst. U. S. Atty., Richard K. Burke, U. S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiff-appellee.
¶3Before MERRILL, ELY and TRASK, Circuit Judges.
¶5The constitutionality of the presumption of knowledge of importation drawn from the fact of possession of heroin has been settled in Turner v. United States, 396 U.S. 398, 90 S.Ct. 642, 24 L.Ed.2d 610 (1970).
¶6There was ample evidence of dominion and control to present a jury question as to whether appellant had constructive possession.
¶7We find no basis for reversal under Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), respecting testimony as to statements made by appellant’s codefendant. The statements were made during the commission of the crime, Kay v. United States, 421 F.2d 1007 (9th Cir. 1970), and do not appear in any way to have implicated appellant.
¶8Judgment affirmed.