UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
DANIEL F. BROOKS, A/K/A DANIEL F. DRAKE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 21 U.S.C. § 176A Construction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Appellant urges that his conviction for violation of 21 U.S.C. § 176a is controlled by Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6, 89 S.Ct. 1532, 23 L.Ed.2d 57 [U.S. May 20, 1969], and should be reversed.1
The evidence conclusively shows and the trial court found 2 that the appellant transported the marijuana in question from the Republic of Mexico into the United States of America. No reliance was had upon the presumption arising from possession.
Affirmed.
. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5th Cir. 1969, 409 F. 2d 804, Part I.
. Trial by jury was waived by both the appellant and the Government and was by the trial court who filed findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Couch v. United States, 409 U.S. 322 (U.S. 1973)
-
Bellis v. United States, 417 U.S. 85 (U.S. 1974)
-
United States & William L. Hall v. Roundtree, 420 F.2d 845 (5th Cir. 1969)
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 (U.S. 1969)
- Murphy v. Houma Well Serv., 409 F.2d 804 (5th Cir. 1969)