United States v. Steve Carl Eide
This text of 427 F.2d 543 (United States v. Steve Carl Eide) 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.
Opinion
Steve Carl Eide appeals from his non-jury conviction for possession and transfer of a firearm not registered to him, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) and (e).
We find no merit in the contentions raised by appellant and affirm.
Testimony regarding a robbery planned by appellant was admissible at *544 trial for the purpose of establishing a motive for possession of the firearm, a machine gun. See Loux v. United States, 389 F.2d 911, 918-919 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 867, 89 S.Ct. 151, 21 L.Ed.2d 135 (1968).
An extrajudicial statement made by appellant’s co-defendant at the time of his arrest was likewise admissible. The co-defendant — who was acquitted — took the stand at trial, confirmed the statement in substance, and was interrogated by appellant’s counsel. There was no violation of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968).
The court’s determination that appellant was not entrapped into committing the offenses charged was supported by substantial evidence.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
427 F.2d 543, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8963, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-steve-carl-eide-ca9-1970.