United States v. Arthur Richard Whitehead, True Name, Edward Tremblay

Appellant makes a number of arguments seeking to convince us that we should overturn his conviction on a Dyer Act charge ( 18 U.S.C. § 2312 ), because he did not receive a fair trial. We think he was fairly tried.

First, he says that the district court presented him in a bad light before the jury by references to other names appellant had used. The appellant himself generated the confusion over his name by using multiple aliases and by telling inconsistent stories about his true name. There is no indication that the challenged references were inappropriate in the context of this trial.

Second, he claims that there was plain error in admitting evidence of other crimes. That evidence was relevant to prove material factual issues; it was not offered or admitted for the purpose of showing appellant’s bad character. That the evidence was admissible under the circumstances is well settled. (E.g., Parker v. United States (9th Cir. 1968) 400 F.2d 248 ; Metheany v. United States (9th Cir. 1968) 390 F.2d 559 .)

Next, he complains about the admission of certain statements he gave to law enforcement officers while he was in jail and after he had been fully advised pursuant to Miranda. No…