United States v. Anthony Ferguson Kaiser

599 F.2d 942, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14293
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
DecidedJune 4, 1979
Docket78-1796
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 599 F.2d 942 (United States v. Anthony Ferguson Kaiser) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Anthony Ferguson Kaiser, 599 F.2d 942, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14293 (10th Cir. 1979).

Opinion

*943 McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judge.

Anthony Kaiser was convicted by a jury of distributing a controlled substance, namely amphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). In the indictment, amphetamine was described as a Schedule III controlled substance. This was an error, be it typographical or otherwise, as amphetamine is a Schedule II controlled substance, rather than Schedule III. *

At the conclusion of all the evidence, defense counsel moved for a judgment of acquittal on the ground that the Government had failed to show that amphetamine was a Schedule III controlled substance, as stated in the indictment. This motion was denied. Thereafter, counsel sought, but was denied, an instruction to the effect that Kaiser should be found not guilty unless the Government proved that amphetamine was a Schedule III controlled substance.

On appeal the only matter urged as ground for reversal relates to the fact that the indictment mistakenly listed amphetamine as a Schedule III controlled substance, whereas in fact it is a Schedule II controlled substance. Such does not warrant a reversal.

Fed.R.Crim.P. 7(c)(3) provides as follows: Error in the citation or its omission shall not be ground for dismissal of the indictment or information or for reversal of a conviction if the error or omission did not mislead the defendant to his prejudice.

Describing amphetamine as a Schedule III controlled substance, when actually it is a Schedule II controlled substance, is a type of “error” contemplated by Rule 7(c)(3). Such error, under the rule, is not ground for reversal of a conviction on appeal unless the defendant was misled to his prejudice. There is nothing in the present record to indicate that Kaiser was misled to his prejudice. Kaiser, along with three others, was charged with unlawfully, knowingly and intentionally distributing amphetamine on or about August 24, 1977, in Denver, Colorado in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Thus, Kaiser was clearly apprised of the transaction relied on by the Government. Had Kaiser been acquitted, he had adequate protection against being tried again on the same transaction. Of course, Kaiser was not acquitted, but was convicted, and now appeals that conviction.

In support of our disposition of the matter, see United States v. Walker, 557 F.2d 741, at 746 (10th Cir. 1977); United States v. Malicoate, 531 F.2d 439 (10th Cir. 1975); and Robbins v. United States, 476 F.2d 26 (10th Cir. 1973).

Judgment affirmed.

*

Amphetamine was by statute listed as a Schedule III controlled substance. 21 U.S.C. § 812. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 811, amphetamine was reclassified as a Schedule II controlled substance. 21 C.F.R. § 1308.12.

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

Related

United States v. Allen
603 F.3d 1202 (Tenth Circuit, 2010)
United States v. Covarrubia-Mendiola
241 F. App'x 569 (Tenth Circuit, 2007)
Aranda v. Commissioner
432 F.3d 1140 (Tenth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Irak Corona
125 F.3d 863 (Tenth Circuit, 1997)
United States v. Corona
Tenth Circuit, 1997
United States v. Greenwood
974 F.2d 1449 (Fifth Circuit, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
599 F.2d 942, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-anthony-ferguson-kaiser-ca10-1979.