United States v. Earnest Norman

Earnest Norman appeals from his conviction on three counts of an indictment charging violations of the narcotic laws, and from the subsequent denial of a motion for a new trial.

One of his arguments in this court is that the evidence is insufficient to support the jury verdict of guilty.

The only evidence received at the trial was that which was produced by the Government. That evidence reflects the product of what has become almost classic procedure by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics in gathering evidence against persons suspected of narcotics violations.

On the morning of January 14, 1964, Government Agent Charles R. McDonnell monitored a telephone call between Porter White, a special employee of the government, and the defendant. During this telephone conversation White arranged to purchase a quantity of heroin from defendant. McDonnell and another agent then strip-searched White and ascertained that he had no narcotics in his possession. White was provided with government advance funds to enable him to purchase narcotics from defendant.

Next, McDonnell drove with White to 955-A Oak Street, San Francisco, where White and defendant had arranged over the telephone to complete…