TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Billie Joe Campbell, AKA Shorty Greek

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Billie Joe CAMPBELL, AKA Shorty Greek, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Campbell, 466 F.2d 529 (9th Cir. 1972)
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
December 11, 1972
Docket
No. 72-1113
Judges
Koelsch, Duniway, Choy
Citations
466 F.2d 529

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Billie Joe Campbell was convicted by a jury of violating 21 U.S.C. § 952 (a) for smuggling marijuana into the United States from Mexico and of knowingly and intentionally distributing marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). He appeals. We affirm.

Campbell contends that the district court erred (1) when it admitted into evidence a receipt found in the glove compartment of a vehicle used in the smuggling, indicating the purchase of a weapon by Campbell; and (2) when it failed to give the jury special instructions regarding the use of testimony by a government agent as to what he did after talking to an informant. In addition, Campbell contends that the prosecution failed to sustain the burden of proof that he at any time had possession of any marijuana.

Although circumstantial evidence which is relevant may be excluded *531 because of its countervailing prejudicial effect on the defendant, United States v. Pichnarcik, 427 F.2d 1290, 1291 (9th Cir. 1970), the district judge’s determination in this area is to be reversed only if he has abused his wide discretion. Wilson v. United States, 250 F.2d 312, 325 (9th Cir. 1958);

accord, United States v. Fisher, 455 F.2d 1101, 1104 (2d Cir. 1972). Appellant had asserted an alibi defense, so evidence connecting him with the car and the marijuana was crucial. The gun-purchase receipt bore appellant’s full name, and one of the government agent witnesses had been unable to identify appellant as the man he had seen. Admission of the evidence was not an abuse of discretion.

See United States v. Fisher, supra;

United States v. Pichnarcik, supra.

Neither was it error for the lower court to overrule appellant’s hearsay objection to a government agent’s testimony regarding what he did after talking to an informant. This was not hearsay, as the witness did not testify as to what the informant told him, nor was the evidence offered to prove the truth of what the informant said. Davis v. United States, 411 F.2d 1126, 1127-1128 (5th Cir. 1969). No limiting instruction was requested and the failure to give one was not reversible error. Busby v. United States, 296 F.2d 328, 332 (9th Cir. 1961), cert. denied 369 U.S. 876 , 82 S.Ct. 1147 , 8 L.Ed.2d 278 (1962); Craft v. United States, 403 F.2d 360, 363 (9th Cir. 1968).

Finally, there was clearly sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Campbell had smuggled contraband across the border. While it is true that mere presence or proximity to contraband is insufficient to establish guilt, United States v. Thomas, 453 F.2d 141, 143 (9th Cir. 1971), cert. denied 405 U.S. 975 (1972), 92 S.Ct. 1195 , 31 L.Ed.2d 249 , there was additional evidence including the testimony of government agents and several accomplices which tied appellant in with the marijuana.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 19 cases

View all citing references →
1972: 11973: 21975: 11976: 31977: 31980: 41984: 11989: 11992: 11998: 12002: 119722026peak 1980 · 4

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Julienne Jesse May622 F.2d 1000 (9th Cir. 1980)
  2. Schaffer v. State777 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989)
  3. United States v. Donald Eugene Parker, United States of America v. Nicholas Faithe549 F.2d 1217 (9th Cir. 1977)
  4. United States v. Donald Anderson and Jack Smith532 F.2d 1218 (9th Cir. 1976)
  5. Richard Gray v. Shell Oil Company, Shell Oil Company v. Richard Gray469 F.2d 742 (9th Cir. 1972)
  6. State v. Litzau650 N.W.2d 177 (Minn. 2002)

Most recent

  1. State v. Litzau650 N.W.2d 177 (Minn. 2002)
  2. United States v. Jimale L. Williams133 F.3d 1048 (7th Cir. 1998)
  3. United States v. Juan Angel Huguez-Ibarra, United States of America v. Dagobastro Olivarria-Palacios954 F.2d 546 (9th Cir. 1992)
  4. Schaffer v. State777 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989)
  5. Johnson v. State456 So. 2d 529 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
  6. United States v. Michael S633 F.2d 773 (9th Cir. 1980)

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 8

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Fisher, 455 F.2d 1101 (2d Cir. 1972) 45
United States v. Pichnarcik, 427 F.2d 1290 (9th Cir. 1970) 15
Wilson v. United States, 250 F.2d 312 (9th Cir. 1958) 104
Busby v. United States, 296 F.2d 328 (9th Cir. 1961) 93
United States of Am., & v. Frank Leroy Thomas, & United States of Am., & v. Alfred Dennis Lucas, &, 453 F.2d 141 (9th Cir. 1972) 42
Jones v. Bd. of Educ. of Daviess Cnty., 405 U.S. 975 (1972) 35
Davis v. United States, 411 F.2d 1126 (5th Cir. 1969) 32
Craft v. United States, 403 F.2d 360 (9th Cir. 1968) 22

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