The United States of America v. Norman Arthur Rogers, the United States of America v. John Michael Highfill

549 F.2d 107, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 5901
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedDecember 10, 1976
Docket76-1089
StatusPublished

This text of 549 F.2d 107 (The United States of America v. Norman Arthur Rogers, the United States of America v. John Michael Highfill) 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
The United States of America v. Norman Arthur Rogers, the United States of America v. John Michael Highfill, 549 F.2d 107, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 5901 (9th Cir. 1976).

Opinion

549 F.2d 107

The UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Norman Arthur ROGERS, Appellant.
The UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
John Michael HIGHFILL, Appellant.

Nos. 76-1089, 76-1567.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Dec. 10, 1976.

Benjamin O. Andersen (argued), of Gladstein, Leonard, Patsey & Andersen, San Francisco, Cal., Mark I. Soler (argued), of Soler, Treuhaft, Walker, Brown & Cooper, Oakland, Cal., for appellants.

Raymond D. Pike, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Reno, Nev., for appellee.

Before ELY, CARTER and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In these combined appeals from convictions arising out of transactions with 4,293 pounds of marijuana, the appellants challenge as irrational and therefore unconstitutional the laws and regulations denouncing the importation and related possessory offenses and conspiracies to commit those offenses in respect to marijuana.

They also ask us to hold, on the "cannabis species" defense, that the particular species of marijuana here involved is not the one Congress intended to denounce in the challenged laws. Neither point requires discussion.

The constitutionality of the marijuana laws has been settled adversely to the appellants in this circuit. United States v. Rodriquez-Camacho, 468 F.2d 1220, 1222 (9th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 985, 93 S.Ct. 1512, 36 L.Ed.2d 182 (1973); see also United States v. Kiffer, 477 F.2d 349, 356-357 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 831, 94 S.Ct. 62, 38 L.Ed.2d 65 (1973).

The so-called species defense was rejected by this court in United States v. Kelly, 527 F.2d 961 (9th Cir. 1976).

Affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Roberto Rodriquez-Camacho
468 F.2d 1220 (Ninth Circuit, 1972)
United States v. John C. Kiffer
477 F.2d 349 (Second Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Michael Lemoyne Kelly
527 F.2d 961 (Ninth Circuit, 1976)
United States v. Rogers
549 F.2d 107 (Ninth Circuit, 1976)
Lucas v. United States
410 U.S. 985 (Supreme Court, 1973)
Brigham v. United States
414 U.S. 831 (Supreme Court, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
549 F.2d 107, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 5901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-united-states-of-america-v-norman-arthur-rogers-the-united-states-of-ca9-1976.