Roosevelt Nontgomery v. United States

Appellant takes this appeal from judgment of conviction of receiving, concealing, selling and facilitating the concealment, transportation and sale of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 174 .

During trial a narcotics agent testified to an oral confession given by appellant. Appellant contends that his confession was inadmissible under rules laid down in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 43 .6, 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). This contention is not properly before us. No objection was made to the admission of the testimony on this ground, nor can it be said that its admission was plain error.

Appellant complains that he was convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of an informer. He is in error; there was corroboration. Even were there not, the present rule of our court is that the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, if believed by the jury, will suffice. Audett v. United States, 265 F.2d 837 (9th Cir. 1959) ; Darden v. United States, 405 F.2d 1054 (9th Cir. 1969).

Appellant complains that he received a more severe sentence than did his accomplice, who pleaded guilty, and that his heavier sentence was imposed solely because he asserted his right to trial. We find no…