United States v. Grayce Marie Cativiela
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Grayce Marie CATIVIELA, Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
The judgment and conviction for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 495 is affirmed.
The alleged newly discovered evidence offered in the petition for a new trial was either available at trial or was unlikely to produce an acquittal. It was not error to deny appellant’s motion for new trial. Evalt v. United States, 382 F.2d 424 (9th Cir. 1967).
None of the court’s rulings on the admissibility of evidence claimed by the appellant as error was an abuse of discretion or resulted in prejudice to the appellant. Therefore appellant’s claims are without merit. United States v. Brown, 455 F.2d 1201 (9th Cir. 1972).
The written stipulation of facts and the jury waiver signed by the appellant are valid waivers and do not deny due process. United States v. Goodwin, 446 F.2d 894 (9th Cir. 1971); Pool v. United States, 344 F.2d 943 (9th Cir. 1965).
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.