¶1Michael S. Rieschling, Steve Carl Eide, Seattle, Wash., for appellant.
¶2Stan Pitkin, U. S. Atty., John M. Darrah, J. Byron Holcomb, Asst. U. S. Attys., Seattle, Wash., for appellee.
¶3Before DUNIWAY, WRIGHT and TRASK, Circuit Judges.
¶5Steve Carl Eide appeals from his non-jury conviction for possession and transfer of a firearm not registered to him, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) and (e).
¶6We find no merit in the contentions raised by appellant and affirm.
¶7Testimony regarding a robbery planned by appellant was admissible at *544trial for the purpose of establishing a motive for possession of the firearm, a machine gun. See Loux v. United States, 389 F.2d 911, 918-919 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 867, 89 S.Ct. 151, 21 L.Ed.2d 135 (1968).
¶8An extrajudicial statement made by appellant’s co-defendant at the time of his arrest was likewise admissible. The co-defendant — who was acquitted — took the stand at trial, confirmed the statement in substance, and was interrogated by appellant’s counsel. There was no violation of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968).
¶9The court’s determination that appellant was not entrapped into committing the offenses charged was supported by substantial evidence.
¶10Judgment affirmed.