Charles Duane Armsbury, and v. United States

443 F.2d 74, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10693
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 16, 1971·No. 26732_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of conviction on two counts for violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (c) and 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d), gun control sections, is affirmed.

Appellant’s main points are answered by United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601, 91 S.Ct. 1112, 28 L.Ed.2d 356, decided April 5, 1971; Sipes v. United States, 8 Cir., 321 F.2d 174; United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 59 S.Ct. 816, 83 L.Ed. 1206; United States v. Kim, 9 Cir., 430 F.2d 58. See also United States v. Crow, 9 Cir., 439 F.2d 1193, decided March 24, 1971.

We cannot accept the contention that trial counsel was incompetent.

In the context of the case, we find no error in permitting the police officer to testify in his Marine uniform.

There was so much evidence of guilt that we believe the admission into evidence of Armbury’s own statement that he was a “revolutionary” was harmless, assuming there was error. We do not hold it was error.

The motion for bail is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Charles Duane Armsbury, and v. United States, 443 F.2d 74, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10693 (9th Cir. 1971).

443 F.2d 74 (Charles Duane Armsbury, and v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Miller
307 U.S. 174 (Supreme Court, 1939)
United States v. Freed
401 U.S. 601 (Supreme Court, 1971)
Norman Gene Sipes v. United States
321 F.2d 174 (Eighth Circuit, 1963)
United States v. Hayden Thopless Crow
439 F.2d 1193 (Ninth Circuit, 1971)