United States v. Jay B. Dixon

460 F.2d 309, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9601
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMay 12, 1972
Docket72-1107
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 460 F.2d 309 (United States v. Jay B. Dixon) 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. Jay B. Dixon, 460 F.2d 309, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9601 (9th Cir. 1972).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Jay B. Dixon appeals his conviction by a jury of smuggling, concealing, and facilitating the transportation of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 176a. We affirm.

When Dixon drove his car across the Mexican border, a search revealed thirty pounds of marijuana secreted in the trunk and beneath the rear seat. Dixon argues that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he knew the marijuana was in the car. However, the simple act of driving a loaded car provides a substantial basis for a conclusion of knowledge. United States v. Gonzalez, 456 F.2d 1067 (9th Cir., 1972); United States v. Ascolani-Gonzalez, 449 F.2d 159 (9th Cir. 1971). The jury was not obliged to believe Dixon’s story that, unknown to him, someone else loaded the car. United States v. Trujillo-Tirado, *310 448 F.2d 1269 (9th Cir., 1971). The evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. See United States v. Nelson, 419 F.2d 1237. 1241-1245 (9th Cir., 1969).

Dixon’s motions for the appointment of a new attorney and for a complete transcript of the trial proceedings are denied.

The conviction is affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Rodrigo Nieves-Cortez
401 F. App'x 263 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
United States v. Flores-Delgado
233 F. App'x 651 (Ninth Circuit, 2007)
State v. Smith
823 A.2d 664 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2003)
Smith v. State
805 A.2d 1108 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2002)
United States v. Pablo Corona-Rocha
12 F.3d 1109 (Ninth Circuit, 1993)
United States v. Juan Rubio-Villareal
967 F.2d 294 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
United States v. John P. Cloughessy
572 F.2d 190 (Ninth Circuit, 1977)
Schmidt v. State
253 N.W.2d 204 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1977)
United States v. Eric Paul Durcan
539 F.2d 29 (Ninth Circuit, 1976)
Byars v. State
533 S.W.2d 175 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1976)
United States v. Martin Molina Oviedo, Jr.
525 F.2d 881 (Fifth Circuit, 1976)
United States v. Eduardo Castillo-Burgos
501 F.2d 217 (Ninth Circuit, 1974)
United States v. Jerry Seidman
503 F.2d 1027 (Ninth Circuit, 1974)
United States v. Henry Martin Ramos
476 F.2d 624 (Ninth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Jose Luis Zamora-Corona
465 F.2d 427 (Ninth Circuit, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
460 F.2d 309, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jay-b-dixon-ca9-1972.