Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

United States v. Savage

292 F.2d 264

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1961-06-30
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. Here the trial judge, sitting without a jury and acting on clear evidence that defendant had possession of heroin, used the statutory inference permitted from possession to find that the drug had been illegally imported into the United States and that the statute 21 U.S.C. § 174 had been violated. There have been too many cases sustaining this or a like inference as reasonable and rational for us now to hold it invalid. Yee Hem v. United States, 268 U.S. 178, 184, 45 S.Ct. 470, 69 L.Ed. 904; Casey v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Savage. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
6 opinions
UNITED STATES v. SAVAGE,292 F.2d 264(2nd Cir. 1961)
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Joseph SAVAGE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 413, Docket 26063.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued June 19, 1961.
Decided June 30, 1961.
Edward Q. Carr, Jr., New York City (Anthony F. Marra, New York City, on the brief), for defendant-appellant.

Alfred Donati, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., S.D.N.Y., New York City (Robert M. Morgenthau, U.S. Atty., and Arthur I. Rosett, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City, on the brief), for appellee.
Before CLARK and SMITH, Circuit Judges, and DAWSON, District Judge.
PER CURIAM.
Here the trial judge, sitting without a jury and acting on clear evidence that defendant had possession of heroin, used the statutory inference permitted from possession to find that the drug had been illegally imported into the United States and that the statute 21 U.S.C. § 174 had been violated. There have been too many cases sustaining this or a like inference as reasonable and rational for us now to hold it invalid. Yee Hem v. United States,268 U.S. 178, 184, 45 S.Ct. 470, 69 L.Ed. 904; Casey v. United States,276 U.S. 413, 418, 48 S.Ct. 373, 72 L.Ed. 632; United States v. Moe Liss, 2 Cir.,105 F.2d 144, 146; Velasquez v. United States, 10 Cir.,244 F.2d 416, 419; Cellino v. United States, 9 Cir.,276 F.2d 941, 943-946; Walker v. United States, 5 Cir.,285 F.2d 52, 58-60.

We are indebted to assigned counsel and to the New York Legal Aid Society for ably protecting the rights of the accused.

Conviction affirmed.Page 265