Lorenzo Ramirez v. United States

Following trial to a jury, appellant was convicted on five counts of a seven count indictment returned against appellant and co-defendant Ruiz. Counts ONE and TWO related only to the co-defend ant Ruiz. Counts THREE, FOUR, FIVE and SIX charged appellant and Ruiz jointly with unlawful concealment and sale of illegally imported heroin, and Count SEVEN charged appellant, only, with unlawful concealment of illegally imported heroin all in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 174 .

Appellant’s assignment of errors state:

The court instructed the jury on circumstantial evidence as follows:

The above instruction was immediately preceded by the court’s instruction pertaining to reasonable doubt, which instructions we find to be clear, comprehensive and complete.

Appellant states in his objection to the quoted instruction as follows:

We find no merit in appellant’s contention. In Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121 at pages 139-140, 75 S.Ct. 127 at page 137, 99 L.Ed. 150 (1954), it is stated as follows:

In this same connection appellant argues that:

We note that appellant at no time during the trial moved for a judgment of acquittal based upon the insufficiency of the evidence, nor did he…