United States v. Savage

292 F.2d 264
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided June 30, 1961·No. No. 413, Docket 26063·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Here the trial judge, sitting without a jury and acting on clear evidence that defendant had possession of heroin, used the statutory inference permitted from possession to find that the drug had been illegally imported into the United States and that the statute 21 U.S.C. § 174 had been violated. There have been too many cases sustaining this or a like inference as reasonable and rational for us now to hold it invalid. Yee Hem v. United States, 268 U.S. 178, 184, 45 S.Ct. 470, 69 L.Ed. 904; Casey v. United States, 276 U.S. 413, 418, 48 S.Ct. 373, 72 L.Ed. 632; United States v. Moe Liss, 2 Cir., 105 F.2d 144, 146; Velasquez v. United States, 10 Cir., 244 F.2d 416, 419; Cellino v. United States, 9 Cir., 276 F.2d 941, 943-946; Walker v. United States, 5 Cir., 285 F.2d 52, 58-60.

We are indebted to assigned counsel and to the New York Legal Aid Society for ably protecting the rights of the accused.

Conviction affirmed.

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

United States v. Savage, 292 F.2d 264 (2d Cir. 1961).

292 F.2d 264 (United States v. Savage) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Robert Burns Johnson v. United States of America
422 F.2d 555 (Seventh Circuit, 1970)
United States v. James Devenere
332 F.2d 160 (Second Circuit, 1964)
United States v. Savage
309 F.2d 142 (Second Circuit, 1962)
United States v. Joseph Savage
292 F.2d 264 (Second Circuit, 1961)