Richard Jack v. United States

Appellant, following jury trial, was found guilty on two counts of narcotics violations designated as counts 1 and 3. He was sentenced to imprisonment for terms of 20 years on each count, the sentences to run concurrently. Upon this appeal error is assigned in four respects.

1. Assignment of error is not available to appellant as to the instruction of which he complains, since no objection was interposed at trial. Rule 30, F.R.Cr.P. Moreover, we recently upheld a similar instruction in Robison v. United States, 379 F.2d 338 (9th Cir. 1967).

2. There is no merit in appellant’s contention, as to count 1, that it was error to receive evidence of a conversation transmitted to a state narcotics agent by means of a Fargo device concealed on an informer who was purchasing narcotics from appellant. Lopez v. United States, 373 U.S. 427 , 83 S.Ct. 1381, 10 . L.Ed.2d 462 (1963); On Lee v. United States, 343 U.S. 747 , 72 S.Ct. 967 , 96 L.Ed. 1270 (1952); Todisco v. United States, 298 F.2d 208 (9th Cir.), cert, denied, 368 U.S. 989 , 82 S.Ct. 602 , 7 L.Ed.2d 527 (1962). Here the testimony of the officer who overheard the conversation was used solely to corroborate the informer’s testimony,…