Jesus M. v. Quintero v. The United States of America

Ninth Circuit

Jesus M. v. Quintero v. The United States of America

409 F.2d 839, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12864

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 11, 1969

Docket22491

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 409 F.2d 839 (Jesus M. v. Quintero v. The United States of America) 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

Jesus M. v. Quintero v. The United States of America, 409 F.2d 839, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12864 (9th Cir. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Quintero was convicted on three counts involving the importation and transportation of untaxed heroin. We affirm.

The evidence was sufficient. This is a much stronger case than Ramirez v. United States, 9 Cir., 363 F.2d 33, upon which Quintero relies. Here there were act, word and conduct on the part of Quintero which were found wanting in Ramirez.

A contention was and is made by Quintero that Galindo, a joint actor, did not properly waive his Fifth Amendment rights when he testified. We cannot agree. If Galindo had been believed, his testimony was all favorable to Quintero. Furthermore, Galindo’s privilege was not Quintero’s.

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

PER CURIAM:

Quintero was convicted on three counts involving the importation and transportation of untaxed heroin. We affirm.

The evidence was sufficient. This is a much stronger case than Ramirez v. United States, 9 Cir., 363 F.2d 33, upon which Quintero relies. Here there were act, word and conduct on the part of Quintero which were found wanting in Ramirez.

A contention was and is made by Quintero that Galindo, a joint actor, did not properly waive his Fifth Amendment rights when he testified. We cannot agree. If Galindo had been believed, his testimony was all favorable to Quintero. Furthermore, Galindo’s privilege was not Quintero’s.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

409 F.2d 839, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jesus-m-v-quintero-v-the-united-states-of-america-ca9-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack