United States v. Travis Grant Ashbrook

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Travis Grant Ashbrook

433 F.2d 988

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedNovember 5, 1970

Docket25384

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 433 F.2d 988 (United States v. Travis Grant Ashbrook) 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. Travis Grant Ashbrook, 433 F.2d 988 (9th Cir. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The case was tried upon a stipulation which established the basic facts. Appellant shipped from West Pakistan to Los Angeles International Airport, naming himself as consignee, two surfboards containing approximately 40 pounds of hashish. He claimed them at the airport and transported them by car and truck to a point in Riverside County, California, where he and two original co-defendants were arrested.

Appellant’s argument on appeal is based upon Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39, 88 S.Ct. 697, 19 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); Grosso v. United States, 390 U.S. 62, 88 S.Ct. 709, 19 L.Ed.2d 906 (1968); and Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85, 88 S.Ct. 722, 19 L.Ed.2d 923 (1968); and upon Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6, 89 S.Ct. 1532, 23 L.Ed.2d 57 (1969). He contends that he could not be convicted as an importer under the rationale of those cases because as an importer he would have been required to disclose incriminating evidence. Because the government may not do indirectly what it cannot do directly, he continues, it may not convict him of receiving, concealing and facilitating the transportation of contraband. He frankly concedes that his argument was rejected in Witt v. United States, 413 F.2d 303 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 932, 90 S.Ct. 272, 24 L.Ed.2d 230 (1969). He asks us to reconsider our decision. We are unwilling *989 to do so. We believe Witt was properly decided. It has been followed numerous times by this court. United States v. Vansant, 423 F.2d 620, 621 (9th Cir. 1970); Corwin v. United States, 423 F.2d 33, 34 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 398 U.S. 938, 90 S.Ct. 1842, 26 L.Ed.2d 271 (1970); United States v. Reyes-Meza De Polanco, 422 F.2d 1304, 1305 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1081, 90 S.Ct. 1536, 25 L.Ed.2d 817 (1970) and United States v. Cordova, 421 F.2d 471, 475 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 398 U.S. 941, 90 S.Ct. 1855, 26 L.Ed.2d 276 (1970).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The case was tried upon a stipulation which established the basic facts. Appellant shipped from West Pakistan to Los Angeles International Airport, naming himself as consignee, two surfboards containing approximately 40 pounds of hashish. He claimed them at the airport and transported them by car and truck to a point in Riverside County, California, where he and two original co-defendants were arrested.

Appellant’s argument on appeal is based upon Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39, 88 S.Ct. 697, 19 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); Grosso v. United States, 390 U.S. 62, 88 S.Ct. 709, 19 L.Ed.2d 906 (1968); and Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85, 88 S.Ct. 722, 19 L.Ed.2d 923 (1968); and upon Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6, 89 S.Ct. 1532, 23 L.Ed.2d 57 (1969). He contends that he could not be convicted as an importer under the rationale of those cases because as an importer he would have been required to disclose incriminating evidence. Because the government may not do indirectly what it cannot do directly, he continues, it may not convict him of receiving, concealing and facilitating the transportation of contraband. He frankly concedes that his argument was rejected in Witt v. United States, 413 F.2d 303 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 932, 90 S.Ct. 272, 24 L.Ed.2d 230 (1969). He asks us to reconsider our decision. We are unwilling *989 to do so. We believe Witt was properly decided. It has been followed numerous times by this court. United States v. Vansant, 423 F.2d 620, 621 (9th Cir. 1970); Corwin v. United States, 423 F.2d 33, 34 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 398 U.S. 938, 90 S.Ct. 1842, 26 L.Ed.2d 271 (1970); United States v. Reyes-Meza De Polanco, 422 F.2d 1304, 1305 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1081, 90 S.Ct. 1536, 25 L.Ed.2d 817 (1970) and United States v. Cordova, 421 F.2d 471, 475 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 398 U.S. 941, 90 S.Ct. 1855, 26 L.Ed.2d 276 (1970).

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

433 F.2d 988, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-travis-grant-ashbrook-ca9-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack