Jose Enriquez Oyervides v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Jose Enriquez Oyervides v. United States

423 F.2d 1209, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 10145

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 25, 1970

Docket28603_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 423 F.2d 1209 (Jose Enriquez Oyervides v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jose Enriquez Oyervides v. United States, 423 F.2d 1209, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 10145 (5th Cir. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We have concluded on the merits that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. Accordingly, we have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties of this fact in writing. See Huth v. Southern Pacific Co., 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526; Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804; 5th Cir. R. 18.

Jose Oyervides pleaded guilty to the sale of 200 grams of heroin hydrochloride not in the original stamped package. 26 U.S.C. § 4704(a). He now attacks the statute as unconstitutional on the ground that it would compel him to incriminate himself. This argument must fail. United States v. Walker, 5 Cir. 1969, 414 F.2d 876, sustained the constitutionality of that section. Minor v. United States, 1969, 396 U.S. 87, 90 S.Ct. 284, 24 L.Ed.2d 283 and Turner v. United States, 1970, 396 U.S. 398, 90 S.Ct. 642, 24 L.Ed.2d 610, have not altered that conclusion. Consequently, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

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

PER CURIAM:

We have concluded on the merits that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. Accordingly, we have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties of this fact in writing. See Huth v. Southern Pacific Co., 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526; Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804; 5th Cir. R. 18.

Jose Oyervides pleaded guilty to the sale of 200 grams of heroin hydrochloride not in the original stamped package. 26 U.S.C. § 4704(a). He now attacks the statute as unconstitutional on the ground that it would compel him to incriminate himself. This argument must fail. United States v. Walker, 5 Cir. 1969, 414 F.2d 876, sustained the constitutionality of that section. Minor v. United States, 1969, 396 U.S. 87, 90 S.Ct. 284, 24 L.Ed.2d 283 and Turner v. United States, 1970, 396 U.S. 398, 90 S.Ct. 642, 24 L.Ed.2d 610, have not altered that conclusion. Consequently, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

423 F.2d 1209, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 10145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jose-enriquez-oyervides-v-united-states-ca5-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack