Legal Opinion
Albert Agobian and Albert Egishian v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 16, 1963No. 18635PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BARNES, Circuit Judge.
Appellants were convicted by a jury on one count of possession of heroin. 21 U.S.C. § 174. Appellants urge, as grounds for reversal:(1) That the last sentence of § 174 requiring defendant, once having been proved to have possession of narcotics to explain that possession, is unconstitutional.(2) That the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction.
We have repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of § 174, as it applies to heroin and other opium derivatives, and to certain marijuana, at least. The Supreme Court of the United States has instructed us to do so. White…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Yee Hem v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- United States v. SantoreCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1960
- Frank Anthony Cellino v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Turf Center, Inc., Allen, A. Goldberg, Milton Hyatt and Myer Mayor Fox v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- Richard Donald Costello v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
- Edward Pool v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1965
- Charlotte Orozco-Vasquez and Juliano Lopez-Molano v. United States of America, Harry Gamboa Buckley and Mary Delgado Ramirez v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1965
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.