Hugh Bryson v. United States

Bryson, in his petition for rehearing, contends that the instruction on affiliation was fatally defective and that our decision to the eontraiy is inconsistent with our decision in Fisher v. United States, 9 Cir., 1956, 231 F.2d 99 . We find no inconsistency.

In evaluating the instructions on affiliation, we, as well as the court in the Fisher case, used the test stated in Bridges v. Wixon, 1945, 326 U.S. 135, 143 , 65 S.Ct. 1443 , 89 L.Ed. 2103 . In that case, the Supreme Court declared that proof of affiliation must show an adherence to or a furtherance of the purposes and objectives of the Communist Party, as distinguished from mere cooperation with it in lawful activities.

In the Fisher case [ 231 F.2d 106 ], the instruction defined affiliation as follows: “To connect or associate one’s self with; to adopt, hence usually to bring or receive into close connection; to ally.” The court recognized that this instruction did not exclude the possibility that Fisher might have been convicted without proof that he adhered to the purposes of the Party. The conviction was therefore reversed.

In this case, the trial court instructed the jury that “A person to be affiliated with the…