Jose Malagon-Ramirez v. United States

Good Law
404 F.2d 604·1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 4858
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 18, 196822588California516 words

Opinion

Opinion

Carr, J.

This is an appeal from a conviction on a four-count indictment, Counts One and Two involving approximately one ounce of heroin, and Counts Three and Four involving seventy pounds of marihuana.

There are two assignments of error: 1) that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction on Counts One and Two; and 2), that the trial court erred in its instruction on reasonable doubt.

No objection to the instruction was made, thus this court is not required to consider the claimed error. However, it appears that the instruction was in keeping with the law as it has been enunciated by the judges over the ages.

The court instructed the jury that a reasonable doubt was that state of the case which after consideration of all the evidence leaves the minds of the jurors in that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding conviction to a moral certainty of the truth of the charge.

Although a motion for judgment of acquittal was made only as to Count Two, appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient as to Counts One and Two, requiring a reversal of the judgment on those two counts; and because of the prejudicial effect of the evidence on the marihuana counts, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.