De Bon v. United States

Ninth Circuit

De Bon v. United States

174 F.2d 121, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2154

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 21, 1949

DocketNo. 11841

StatusPublished

This text of 174 F.2d 121 (De Bon v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

De Bon v. United States, 174 F.2d 121, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2154 (9th Cir. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted under the first and third counts of an indictment involving the alleged fraudulent acquisition of surplus war materials (automotive vehicles) from the War Assets Administration. The first count charged a conspiracy, the third a substantive offense under 18 U.S. C.A. § 80 [now §§ 287, 1001], Two ex-servicemen indicted with appellant pleaded guilty or nolo co.ntedere and testified as witnesses for the government.

While a large number of errors are assigned the primary contention of appellant has to do with the claimed insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. No useful purpose would be served by a review [122]*122of the testimony. If that of appellant alone were considered we might think his guilt was not established; but there is much more, and it sufficiently appears that appellant, who was an automobile dealer, was unlawfully using the veterans to acquire vehicles he was not entitled to purchase for himself.-

Other points argued are without merit. No reversible error appearing in the record, the judgment is affirmed.-

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted under the first and third counts of an indictment involving the alleged fraudulent acquisition of surplus war materials (automotive vehicles) from the War Assets Administration. The first count charged a conspiracy, the third a substantive offense under 18 U.S. C.A. § 80 [now §§ 287, 1001], Two ex-servicemen indicted with appellant pleaded guilty or nolo co.ntedere and testified as witnesses for the government.

While a large number of errors are assigned the primary contention of appellant has to do with the claimed insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. No useful purpose would be served by a review [122]*122of the testimony. If that of appellant alone were considered we might think his guilt was not established; but there is much more, and it sufficiently appears that appellant, who was an automobile dealer, was unlawfully using the veterans to acquire vehicles he was not entitled to purchase for himself.-

Other points argued are without merit. No reversible error appearing in the record, the judgment is affirmed.-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 F.2d 121, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-bon-v-united-states-ca9-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack