UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
PAUL DARRELL HENLEY AND STANLEY PAUL RUTKOWSKI, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the defendants' convictions for importation and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, finding no reversible error.
Defendants were convicted after a jury trial for importing and possessing with intent to distribute a large quantity of marijuana. They appealed their…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Importation Of Marijuana cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
After a jury trial defendants were convicted of importation and possession with intent to distribute 14,550 pounds of marijuana. 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 952(a), 960(b)(2) and 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1) (B). We have examined the briefs and record in respect to the errors assigned on this appeal. None of these points warrants disturbance of the District Court decision. The prosecutor’s statements, acts, and conduct were in reply to defense arguments, and were, in totality, not unfairly prejudicial to defendants. See United States v. Rhoden, 453 F. 2d 598 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 947, 92 S.Ct. 2050, 32 L.Ed.2d 334 (1972).
The overwhelming evidence of possession of more than seven tons of marijuana justified the court’s refusal to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of simple possession. See Sansone v. United States, 380 U.S. 343, 85 S.Ct. 1004, 13 L.Ed.2d 882 (1965).
Evidence as to defendant Henley’s reputation was properly allowed after he testified and introduced the defense of entrapment. Rocha v. United States, 401 F. 2d 529 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1103, 89 S.Ct. 905, 21 L.Ed. 796 (1969).
In United States v. Gaines, 489 F. 2d 690 (5th Cir. T974), we rejected the argument that the government must prove the seized marijuana was Cannabis Sativa L.
The evidence amply warrants the finding of guilt and no error of law is perceived in the trial.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Klenge M. Nelson, II v. State, 319 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
-
United States v. Alvarez, 735 F.2d 461 (11th Cir. 1984)
-
United States v. Ivey, 546 F.2d 139 (5th Cir. 1977)
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Sansone v. United States, 380 U.S. 343 (U.S. 1965)
- United States v. Rhoden, 453 F.2d 598 (5th Cir. 1972)
- Tramel v. United States, 406 U.S. 947 (U.S. 1972)
- Zemke v. United States, 406 U.S. 947 (U.S. 1972)
- United States v. Gaines, 489 F.2d 690 (5th Cir. 1974)
- Bates v. McMann, 393 U.S. 1103 (U.S. 1969)
- Campbell v. Michigan, 393 U.S. 1103 (U.S. 1969)
- Adolfo Rocha v. United States, 401 F.2d 529 (5th Cir. 1968)