United States v. Cameron

Decision Date20 September 1973
Docket NumberNo. 73-1718.,73-1718.
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Wayne CAMERON, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Jack McCall (argued), of Mason, McCall & Ross, Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant-appellant.

Thomas N. Crowe, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), William C. Smitherman, U. S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before GOODWIN and WALLACE, Circuit Judges, and BYRNE,* District Judge.

WILLIAM M. BYRNE, District Judge:

Cameron was convicted by jury of passing and uttering a counterfeit twenty dollar federal reserve note with knowledge that it was counterfeit, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472.

Although Cameron was indicted for only one incident of passing a counterfeit bill, the government produced evidence pertaining to other similar incidents which occurred on the same date (September 24, 1971) and in the same city (Mesa, Arizona).

Roland Farabee, the person to whom Cameron passed the counterfeit bill, testified that, at 3:30 P.M., Cameron and a female passenger (later identified as Barbara Sue Cowgar) arrived in a 1959 Ford at the gas station where Farabee was employed. Cameron told Farabee that he was there to pick up a tire which he had previously left for repair. When Farabee went to get it, Cameron got out of the Ford, walked to the rear, and opened the trunk. When Farabee returned with the tire, Cameron was holding the counterfeit bill in his hand. After Farabee put the tire in the trunk, Cameron handed him the bill. Since the charge for the tire was only $2.00, Farabee took the bill to the cash box to get change. While doing so, he noticed that "it looked funny," but did not say anything until appellant left, to avoid "any trouble right then." He brought Cameron his change of $18.00. Farabee did not see what Cameron did with the change. Shortly after the Ford drove away, it was determined that the bill was indeed counterfeit. Consequently, the police were summoned. On cross-examination, Farabee described the quality of the counterfeit bill by saying that, "One side looked pretty good. The other side looked pretty bad."

Each of three other witnesses (Ronald Cripe, Norma Jean Sharp, and Lorey Egbert) testified that, in separate incidents earlier that day, Miss Cowgar passed counterfeit twenty dollar bills to them. Each of them also testified that, at the time she made those passes, she was alone and driving a certain 1963 Chevrolet. Each of the victims was suspicious that the bills were counterfeit and turned them over to the authorities.

Marilyn Mills testified that, in a separate incident subsequent to the pass to Farabee, Cameron accompanied Miss Cowgar when she passed a counterfeit twenty dollar bill to her for the purpose of obtaining change for the pop machine. Mrs. Mills testified that Cameron had one hand in his pocket "and I could hear rattling in his pocket, and to me it sounded like change in his pocket and I thought that it was funny that they would ask for change for the pop machine if he already had some."

Cameron testified that about 3:30 P. M., on September 24, Miss Cowgar had stopped by his residence. Since he was in the process of leaving to pick up his tire at Farabee's gas station, he took her with him. At the station, she gave him the twenty dollar bill in order to pay for the tire repair. He, in turn, handed it to Farabee. Then, he gave the $18.00 change back to Miss Cowgar. After leaving the gas station, the pair made four other stops and then returned to his residence. The first stop was at a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • State v. Jones, 4887
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • March 31, 1980
    ...of defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Hall, 552 F.2d 273, 276 (9th Cir. 1977); United States v. Cameron, 484 F.2d 939, 940 (9th Cir. 1973); United States v. Figueroa, 468 F.2d 1055, 1058 (9th Cir. 1972); United States v. Barfield, 447 F.2d 85, 88 (5th Cir. 197......
  • United States v. Davis
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • October 15, 1973

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT