United States v. Frank Nicholis Cepelis

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Frank Nicholis Cepelis

443 F.2d 63, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10141

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 18, 1971

Docket71-1037

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 443 F.2d 63 (United States v. Frank Nicholis Cepelis) 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

United States v. Frank Nicholis Cepelis, 443 F.2d 63, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10141 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In September 1968, appellant was indicted for concealment and sale of marijuana after illegal importation, 21 U.S.C. § 176a and 26 U.S.C. § 4742(a). After trial to the court and conviction, he appealed and this court in United States v. Cepelis, 426 F.2d 134 (9th Cir. 1970) remanded for further proceedings. We asked the trial court to make clear by special findings whether it relied on the statutory presumption of illegal importation for one in possession of marijuana or upon admissions or other evidence.

Upon resubmission to the district court, the trial judge reviewed the transcript, announced that he relied solely on the evidence introduced at the trial in finding that the hashish was illegally imported and that the defendant knew it, and that the presumption of illegal importation and knowledge found in 21 U.S.C. § 176a was in no way relied upon. Upon this second appeal we affirm.

The procedure followed was affirmed in our recent case of United States v. Andrews (Sloan), 439 F.2d 155 (9th Cir. 1971).

The judgment is affirmed and the mandate will issue forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM:

In September 1968, appellant was indicted for concealment and sale of marijuana after illegal importation, 21 U.S.C. § 176a and 26 U.S.C. § 4742(a). After trial to the court and conviction, he appealed and this court in United States v. Cepelis, 426 F.2d 134 (9th Cir. 1970) remanded for further proceedings. We asked the trial court to make clear by special findings whether it relied on the statutory presumption of illegal importation for one in possession of marijuana or upon admissions or other evidence.

Upon resubmission to the district court, the trial judge reviewed the transcript, announced that he relied solely on the evidence introduced at the trial in finding that the hashish was illegally imported and that the defendant knew it, and that the presumption of illegal importation and knowledge found in 21 U.S.C. § 176a was in no way relied upon. Upon this second appeal we affirm.

The procedure followed was affirmed in our recent case of United States v. Andrews (Sloan), 439 F.2d 155 (9th Cir. 1971).

The judgment is affirmed and the mandate will issue forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

443 F.2d 63, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-frank-nicholis-cepelis-ca9-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack