Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

439 F.2d 708

Docket No. 26013.

United States v. Aviles

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1971-03-09

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1971

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1971-03-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

J. Frank Gibson (argued), of Gibson & Gibson, Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant-appellant.

Morton Sitver, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Richard K. Burke, U. S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

The judgment of conviction in this narcotics case is affirmed.

¶2

We find adequate evidence to support the conviction on all counts.

¶3

The failure here to require the government to produce the informant was within the trial court's discretion. The informer was not a witness to or an actor in the transactions. If the informer had participated in the alleged entrapment, we would have a different case.

¶4

The judge here as the trier of fact simply refused to believe Aviles on entrapment.

¶5

There may be too many counts in the indictment, but with concurrent sentences, Aviles was not prejudiced.

/439/f2d/708 · .json · Public domain