TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. David Lee Brooks

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. David Lee BROOKS, Appellant

United States v. Brooks, 473 F.2d 817 (9th Cir. 1973)
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
February 9, 1973
Docket
No. 72-2374
Judges
Hamley, Merrill, Per Curiam, Schnacke
Citations
473 F.2d 8171973 U.S. App. LEXIS 11728

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Defendant and four others were indicted for trafficking in heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. He and one Atkinson were tried separately from the other three. Atkinson’s motion for a judgment of acquittal was granted. The jury found defendant guilty and judgment was rendered upon the verdict. We affirm the judgment.

The appeal is founded upon claims that certain evidence was improperly admitted and that the evidence did not establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Some of the evidence now objected to was not objected to below. As to such evidence, no plain error appears. F.R.Crim.Proc., Rule 52; Marshall v. United States, 409 F.2d 925 (9th Cir., 1969). A declarant obviously intends that his statement to a witness be understood; it is hardly improper to allow the witness to state what was understood.

The remaining evidence was admitted on the basis of a conspiracy. A conspiracy may of course be established by circumstantial evidence, Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 , 62 S.Ct. 457 , 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942), and once a prima facie case is made out testimony of co-conspirators may be received, Sendejas v. United States, 428 F.2d 1040 (9th Cir., 1970).

The evidence was sufficient, under numerous decisions of this Court, to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

E. g., Darden v. United States, 405 F.2d 1054 (9th Cir., 1969); United States v. Williams, 468 F.2d 251 (9th Cir. 1972).

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1973: 11974: 21976: 11980: 119732026peak 1974 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Allen G481 F.2d 864 (9th Cir. 1973)
  2. United States v. Birdie Louise Joshua Harris, United States of America v. Billy Charles Harris501 F.2d 1 (9th Cir. 1974)
  3. United States v. Jennifer J. Wysong528 F.2d 345 (9th Cir. 1976)
  4. United States v. Gregory W. T. Cox633 F.2d 871 (9th Cir. 1980)
  5. Commonwealth v. Russell326 A.2d 303 (Pa. 1974)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Gregory W. T. Cox633 F.2d 871 (9th Cir. 1980)
  2. United States v. Jennifer J. Wysong528 F.2d 345 (9th Cir. 1976)
  3. Commonwealth v. Russell326 A.2d 303 (Pa. 1974)
  4. United States v. Birdie Louise Joshua Harris, United States of America v. Billy Charles Harris501 F.2d 1 (9th Cir. 1974)
  5. United States v. Allen G481 F.2d 864 (9th Cir. 1973)

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 5

DepthCaseCited by
Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 (1942) 8,798
Marshall v. United States, 409 F.2d 925 (9th Cir. 1969) 46
Darden v. United States, 405 F.2d 1054 (9th Cir. 1969) 34
Sendejas v. United States, 428 F.2d 1040 (9th Cir. 1970) 29
United States v. Williams, 468 F.2d 251 (9th Cir. 1972) 3

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