United States v. Steve Carl Eide

Steve Carl Eide appeals from his non-jury conviction for possession and transfer of a firearm not registered to him, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (d) and (e).

We find no merit in the contentions raised by appellant and affirm.

Testimony regarding a robbery planned by appellant was admissible at trial for the purpose of establishing a motive for possession of the firearm, a machine gun. See Loux v. United States, 389 F.2d 911, 918-919 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 867 , 89 S.Ct. 151 , 21 L.Ed.2d 135 (1968).

An extrajudicial statement made by appellant’s co-defendant at the time of his arrest was likewise admissible. The co-defendant — who was acquitted — took the stand at trial, confirmed the statement in substance, and was interrogated by appellant’s counsel. There was no violation of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968).

The court’s determination that appellant was not entrapped into committing the offenses charged was supported by substantial evidence.

Judgment affirmed.