United States v. William Valencia

Second Circuit

United States v. William Valencia

677 F.2d 191

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 13, 1982

Docket367, Docket 81-1317

StatusPublished

Cited by15 cases

This text of 677 F.2d 191 (United States v. William Valencia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second 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. William Valencia, 677 F.2d 191 (2d Cir. 1982).

Pincite

Opinions

VAN GRAAFEILAND, Circuit Judge:

On appellant’s original appeal, United States v. Valencia, 645 F.2d 1158 (2d Cir. 1980), this Court remanded to the district court for a determination “whether there was sufficient evidence of direct communication between [appellant’s wife and appellant] to permit the question of inducement of [appellant] to go to the jury.” Id. at 1169. The district court held that there was not, and appellant concedes there was not.

But appellant had never argued that there was direct proof that Olga communicated the informer’s inducements to him, and, in fact, no such direct proof appears in the record. (Appellant’s Brief at 12.)

Appellant argues that the marital relationship and cohabitation of appellant and his wife permit the inference that appellant knew of the informer’s inducements. The district court held that proof of the marital relationship was not enough and that there was no other proof that the Government’s inducements had been communicated to appellant.

Finding no error, we affirm.

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