TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Patricia Ann Lewis

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patricia Ann LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Lewis, 426 F.2d 266 (9th Cir. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
May 12, 1970
Docket
No. 23074
Judges
Hamley, Merrill, Per Curiam, Trask
Citations
426 F.2d 2661970 U.S. App. LEXIS 9294

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was indicted on nine counts for violating the narcotics laws, 21 U.S. C. § 174 and 26 U.S.C. § 4705 (a). Three separate instances of possession and sale were involved. At the close of the Government’s case three counts were dismissed on motion of the United States, and three on motion of the appellant. At the end of the jury trial appellant was convicted on the remaining three counts and sentenced to five year concurrent terms.

1. Appellant contends that the motion of acquittal should have been granted on two of the remaining counts, on grounds that the indictments were fatally defective in that they charged sale to a federal agent, while the proof offered was of sale to the informer. We disagree. Appellant concedes that she was not misled by the variance; nór do we regard the variance between indictment and proof as affecting substantial rights under Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 82 , 55 S.Ct. 629 , 79 L.Ed. 1314 (1935). Nor is there any possibility of double jeopardy, since the record as well as the indictment must be consulted should that issue arise in a future prosecution. Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749 , 82 S.Ct. 1038 , 8 L.Ed.2d 240 (1962).

2. Appellant also contends that there was insufficient evidence of a sale to go to the jury. After reviewing the record we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to permit the jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant had sold the heroin. Moreover, in the absence of plain error, appellant waived challenge to the denial of the motion for acquittal by electing to go forward with proof. Benchwick v. United States, 297 F.2d 330, 335 (9th Cir. 1961).

3. Appellant asserts in effect that the United States prosecuted the three counts on which it later sought dismissal only to gain entry for evidence otherwise inadmissible. Her position is untenable. It does not appear that the United States was proceeding in bad faith; thus presentation of proof on those counts cannot be said to amount to misconduct.

4. Turner v. United States, 396 U.S. 398 , 90 S.Ct. 642 , 24 L.Ed.2d 610 (1970), is dispositive of appellant’s challenge to the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. § 174 in so far as the statute pertains to heroin.

Judgment affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1972: 11973: 21974: 11975: 11976: 11980: 11984: 11988: 119722026peak 1973 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Perez526 F.2d 859 (5th Cir. 1976)
  2. United States v. Ramon Figueroa-Paz468 F.2d 1055 (9th Cir. 1972)
  3. United States v. Juan Andres Sotelo Martinez, United States of America v. Randolph Stephens AKA Randolph Sidle (True Name)514 F.2d 334 (9th Cir. 1975)
  4. United States v. Harry F. Larson, M.D.507 F.2d 385 (9th Cir. 1974)
  5. United States v. John Richard Comerford857 F.2d 1323 (9th Cir. 1988)
  6. State v. Jones605 P.2d 202 (Nev. 1980)

Most recent

  1. United States v. John Richard Comerford857 F.2d 1323 (9th Cir. 1988)
  2. United States v. Lewis T. Perry740 F.2d 854 (11th Cir. 1984)
  3. State v. Jones605 P.2d 202 (Nev. 1980)
  4. United States v. Perez526 F.2d 859 (5th Cir. 1976)
  5. United States v. Juan Andres Sotelo Martinez, United States of America v. Randolph Stephens AKA Randolph Sidle (True Name)514 F.2d 334 (9th Cir. 1975)
  6. United States v. Harry F. Larson, M.D.507 F.2d 385 (9th Cir. 1974)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935) 3,805
Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749 (1962) 1,481
Turner v. United States, 396 U.S. 398 (1970) 941
Benchwick v. United States, 297 F.2d 330 (9th Cir. 1961) 62

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list