¶1Robert H. Stevenson (argued), Seattle, Wash., for defendant-appellant.
¶2Thomas B. Russell, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Ernest Scott, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Stan Pitkin, U. S. Atty., Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff-appellee.
¶3Before CHAMBERS, HAMLEY and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges.
¶5The judgment of conviction for possession of and for transferring an automatic rifle is affirmed.
¶6In our view, the implications of United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601, 91 S. Ct. 1112, 28 L.Ed.2d 356 (1971) require affirmance.
¶7While the record would seem to indicate that Graff is not vicious but a bumbler, our view is that the jury’s verdict was permissible.
¶8True, it is a felony conviction, but it is apparent that if defendant is a good probationer, because of his youth, his conviction will disappear from the record under applicable law.