United States v. Countryman, 148
| Decision Date | 28 November 1962 |
| Docket Number | Docket 26922.,No. 148,148 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jeremiah COUNTRYMAN, Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Thomas E. Russell, Wethersfield, Conn., for appellant.
Robert C. Zampano, U. S. Atty., District of Connecticut (James D. O'Connor, Asst. U. S. Atty., of counsel), for appellee.
Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, and CLARK and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges.
Appellant was convicted, upon a trial by jury, of having knowingly sold illegally imported heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 174, and of having sold heroin other than in pursuance of an order form issued in blank for that purpose by the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 4705(a). The Government offered proof that the appellant and an associate, one Robert Brown, were introduced to a federal narcotics agent by one Alan Adams, a special employee of the Bureau of Narcotics. As the four men walked along the street, Adams informed the appellant and Brown that Adams' friend wished to purchase some heroin. The federal agent gave Adams five dollars which Adams passed along to the appellant who instructed Adams as to the location in an alleyway of a package of heroin. Adams conveyed this information to the federal agent, who recovered a package hidden in a ventilator in the alley. The contents of the package were later tested at the Bureau of Narcotics and found to be heroin.
We find appellant's contentions for reversing his conviction to be without merit, and we affirm the conviction from the bench.
Appellant raises the defense of entrapment, but this issue was not raised during the course of the trial, and no written request to charge on entrapment was submitted to the trial judge. This issue may not be raised for the first time on appeal. In any event, the contention is without merit. See United States v. Place, 263 F.2d 627 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 360 U.S. 920, 79 S.Ct. 1438, 3 L.Ed.2d 1535 (1959); United States v. Masciale, 236 F.2d 601 (2d Cir.1956), aff'd, 356 U.S. 386, 78 S.Ct. 827, 2 L.Ed. 2d 859 (1958). Appellant also contends that his conviction must fall because the Government failed to produce as its witness the appellant's companion, Robert Brown, and because the Government's case rested almost exclusively upon the testimony of a "self-serving informer," special employee Adams. Brown had been indicted by the grand jury but was a fugitive...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Dennis
...raised by the defense during the trial; it may not be raised, as sought here, for the first time on appeal. See United States v. Countryman, 311 F.2d 189, 191 (2 Cir.1962); People v. Tostado, 217 Cal.App.2d 713, 32 Cal.Rptr. 178, 182 (D.C.App.1963); R.R. 3:7--7. In any event, the evidence a......
-
United States v. Smith, 15507.
...6, cert. den. 375 U.S. 934, 84 S.Ct. 339, 11 L.Ed.2d 266. See also, Puentes v. United States, 319 F.2d 581, 582, C.A. 5; United States v. Countryman, 311 F.2d 189, 191, C.A. 2; and United States v. Vittoria, 284 F.2d 451, 454, C.A. 7. Several questions pertaining to the admission of evidenc......
-
United States v. Priest
...687; Lucas v. United States, 343 F.2d 1 (8 Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 862, 86 S.Ct. 125, 15 L.Ed.2d 100; United States v. Countryman, 311 F.2d 189 (2 Cir. 1962); Hale v. United States, 149 F.2d 401 (5 Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 326 U.S. 732, 66 S.Ct. 40, 90 L.Ed. Affirmed. 1 26 U.S.C......
-
United States v. Fay
...reflected on her credibility and were for the jury to resolve. United States v. Dehar, 388 F.2d 430 (2d Cir. 1968); United States v. Countryman, 311 F.2d 189 (2d Cir. 1962). Anderson also claims that he was denied the right to represent himself at the proceedings below and that the hearing ......