Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States v. Jose Ascolani-Gonzalez

449 F.2d 159

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1971-11-15
Topic
general

PER CURIAM: On July 3, 1970, appellant was apprehended while attempting to enter the United States from Mexico. The car which appellant was driving contained approximately 150 pounds of marihuana, secreted in a hidden compartment. Appellant was subsequently convicted on two counts of violating 21 U.S.C. § 176a: (1) knowingly smuggling 150 pounds of marihuana into the United States with intent to defraud the United States; (2) knowingly receiving, concealing, and facilitating the transportation and concealment of the same with intent to defraud the United States. On appeal, appellant disputes his knowledge of the presence of the marihuana and contests the sufficiency of the evidence in this respect to support conviction. This court has consistently held that the question of the occupant’s knowledge is particularly within the jury’s province, and that once this determination is made, the reviewing court should not disturb the finding where there is a substantial basis for the jury’s inference.

Citator

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

Cited by
13 opinions
UNITED STATES v. ASCOLANI-GONZALEZ,449 F.2d 159(9th Cir. 1971)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose ASCOLANI-GONZALEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 71-1042.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
September 23, 1971.
Rehearing Denied November 15, 1971.
John Moran, San Diego, Cal., for defendant-appellant.

Harry D. Steward, U.S. Atty., Robert H. Filsinger, Chief, Crim.Div., San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before MERRILL, KOELSCH and BROWNING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
On July 3, 1970, appellant was apprehended while attempting to enter the United States from Mexico. The car which appellant was driving contained approximately 150 pounds of marihuana, secreted in a hidden compartment.

Appellant was subsequently convicted on two counts of violating 21 U.S.C. § 176a: (1) knowingly smuggling 150 pounds of marihuana into the United States with intent to defraud the United States; (2) knowingly receiving, concealing, and facilitating the transportation and concealment of the same with intent to defraud the United States.

On appeal, appellant disputes his knowledge of the presence of the marihuana and contests the sufficiency of the evidence in this respect to support conviction.

This court has consistently held that the question of the occupant's knowledge is particularly within the jury's province, and that once this determination is made, the reviewing court should not disturb the finding where there is a substantial basis for the jury's inference.SeeUnited States v. Guzman,446 F.2d 1137(9th Cir. 1971). The act of drivingPage 160a car laden with concealed contraband provides such a substantial basis.Id; Eason v. United States,281 F.2d 818(9th Cir. 1960).

Affirmed.