United States v. Frazier

Decision Date09 December 1970
Docket NumberNo. 162-70,163-70.,162-70
Citation434 F.2d 238
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Maurice De Lawrence FRAZIER and Frankie Chiles, Defendants-Appellants.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

William R. Burkett, U. S. Atty. (John O. Sparks, Asst. U. S. Atty., on the brief), for plaintiff-appellee.

Carroll Samara, Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendant-appellant Maurice De Lawence Frazier.

Henry F. Featherly, Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendant-appellant Frankie Chiles.

Before LEWIS, Chief Judge, McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judge, and BRATTON, District Judge.

McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judge.

Frazier and Chiles, the appellants, were jointly tried and convicted by a jury on each count of a three count information charging the possession and sale of a narcotic drug, heroin hydrochloride, an opium derivative narcotic drug. 26 U.S.C. § 4704(a), 26 U.S.C. § 4705(a), and 21 U.S.C. § 174. Each now seeks reversal of his respective conviction on the same ground, namely, the alleged insufficiency of the evidence. In our view of the matter there is ample evidence to support the several verdicts of the jury and the judgments entered thereon should therefore be affirmed.

The sale which formed the factual basis for the prosecution was made to a government informer, one Eddie Joe Edrington. Upon trial Edrington testified that he was telephonically contacted by one Troy Beck concerning a possible sale by the latter to the former of some heroin. Edrington immediately contacted an agent of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. The agent went at once to Edrington's home and arrangements were then made for the consummation of Beck's offer to sell. Edrington called Beck and the latter agreed to deliver the narcotics to Edrington's home at seven-thirty in the evening. Edrington was then thoroughly searched by the federal agent and given $250 in currency, the agent keeping a list of the serial numbers of the currency given. About 7:30 P.M. a vehicle was driven up in front of Edrington's home and upon a honk of the horn Edrington went to the car, which was parked on the "wrong" side of the street.

Edrington testified that he got in the car and sat on the left-hand side of the rear seat. According to Edrington, Beck was driving the vehicle; Chiles was seated on the right-hand side of the front seat; and Frazier was seated beside him on the rear seat. Edrington stated that though he was best acquainted with Beck, he had known Frazier for about nine months and that he had seen Chiles on several previous occasions. Edrington made positive in court identification of both Chiles and Frazier. (Beck had previously pled guilty to the indictment.)

It was in this setting, then, according to Edrington, that Chiles, on command of Beck, reached back over the front seat and delivered a cellophane package to Edrington. The package contained heroin, according to another government witness, one Tipton, a chemist. Also on the direction of Beck, Edrington counted out the $250 and gave it to Frazier.

The agent for the narcotics bureau testified as to his search of Edrington, the delivery of the $250 to Edrington, and what he saw from Edrington's front room while Edrington was in the Beck car. In this regard the agent testified that he recognized two of the occupants of the car as being Beck and Frazier, but that because his view was partially blocked he could not identify the person seated on the left far side of the front seat. However, according to the agent, he did notice Edrington receive something "from the man sitting next to Beck."

A narcotic agent for the State of Oklahoma testified that he was alerted a couple of hours before the sale and that he and another conducted a stake out of the motel where Beck was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • U.S. v. Gomez
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • January 30, 1987
    ...conviction of a particular person"), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091, 101 S.Ct. 887, 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981); accord United States v. Frazier, 434 F.2d 238, 239-40 (10th Cir.1970) (distinguishing Williamson ); Maestas v. United States, 341 F.2d 493, 495 (10th Cir.1965) (same). But cf. United Stat......
  • United States v. Jackson
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • July 23, 1973
    ...we cannot do because the weight to be given testimony is a function of the jury rather than of the appellate court. United States v. Frazier, 434 F.2d 238 (10th Cir. 1970). Admittedly much of the evidence linking Jackson and Price to the smuggling attempt was circumstantial, but as we have ......
  • U.S. v. Cervantes-Pacheco, CERVANTES-PACHEC
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • July 7, 1986
    ...414 U.S. 1002, 94 S.Ct. 357, 38 L.Ed.2d 238 (1973); United States v. McCaghren, 666 F.2d 1227 (8th Cir.1981); United States v. Frazier, 434 F.2d 238 (10th Cir.1970); United States v. Richardson, 764 F.2d 1514 (11th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Crespo-Diaz v. United States, --- U.S. ----, 10......
  • U.S. v. Munn, 74-1240
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • December 16, 1974
    ...proceedings, the testimony and the inferences therefrom must be viewed in a light most favorable to the Government. United States v. Frazier, 434 F.2d 238 (10th Cir. 1970), and McGee v. United States, 402 F.2d 434 (10th Cir. 1968). Our study of the record convinces us that there was suffici......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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