United States v. Sylvester Riley

434 F.2d 247
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedNovember 10, 1970
Docket25671
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 434 F.2d 247 (United States v. Sylvester Riley) 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. Sylvester Riley, 434 F.2d 247 (9th Cir. 1970).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The trial court undertook to hear and decide the defense of entrapment itself. After considering evidence received at a hearing outside the presence of the jury, the court rejected the defense and declined to submit it to the jury. The government concedes that this was error (see Erwing v. United States, 394 F.2d 829, 830 (9th Cir. 1968)), but contends that the error was harmless because (1) the evidence was insufficient to raise the issue of entrapment, and (2) even if it was sufficient- to go to the jury, “the testimony of defendant was so filled with inconsistencies and contradictions that the jury could have only reached the same result as that reached by the Trial Judge, to wit, the defendant was to be disbelieved.”

We think the defendant’s testimony, taken as true, was sufficient to require submission of the issue of entrapment to the jury. This being so, the defendant’s credibility was for the jury, not the trial court or this court, to decide.

Reversed.

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

Related

United States Ex Rel. Crosby v. State of Delaware
346 F. Supp. 213 (D. Delaware, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
434 F.2d 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-sylvester-riley-ca9-1970.