United States v. John Wesley Burnett, Jr., 418 F.2d 912 (9th Cir. 1969). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. John Wesley Burnett, Jr., 418 F.2d 912 (9th Cir. 1969). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Gerald Mark Williams (ca9, 1991-07-18)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Gerald Mark Williams
9th Cir. · 1991 · confidence medium
Cf. United States v. Valdivia, 492 F.2d 199, 204 (9th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 940 , 94 S.Ct. 1945 , 40 L.Ed.2d 292 (1974); United States v. Burnett, 418 F.2d 912, 913 (9th Cir.1969) (per curiam) ("Defendant cannot complain of the testimony relating to his specific acts of misconduct since it was elicited from the witnesses by the defendant himself during cross-examination.”); United States v. Le Vison, 418 F.2d 624, 626 (9th Cir.1969). 3 .
cited Cited "see" United States v. Cresta
1st Cir. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Burnett, 418 F.2d 912, 913 (9th Cir.1969).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Robert D. Cresta, United States of America v. John J. Gillen, Jr., United States of America v. Anthony Gravallese, United States of America v. Guido Impemba, United States of America v. Gabriel Carvajal, United States of America v. Ernesto Agudelo, United States of America v. Richard T. Ford
1st Cir. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Burnett, 418 F.2d 912, 913 (9th Cir.1969).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
John Wesley BURNETT, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
23387_1.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Nov 14, 1969.
418 F.2d 912
R. Neal Richards (argued), of Beard & Richards, San Diego, Cal., for appellant., Shelby R. Gott (argued), Asst. U. S. Atty., Edwin L. Miller, U. S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for appellee.
Jertberg, Browning, Ely.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Defendant was adjudged guilty as charged in five separate counts alleging offenses under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 371, 1341, 2314, and 15 U.S.C. § 77q.

His first ground of appeal is that the trial judge improperly admitted testimony regarding a declaration against pecuniary interest made by a person deceased at the time of trial. We need not decide the question. Defend[*913] ant was sentenced to three years on each count, all sentences to run concurrently. The declaration was irrelevant to at least one count (count 9), and we are satisfied from an examination of the record as a whole that it did not influence the jury’s guilty verdict with respect to that count. See Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81, 85, 63 S.Ct. 1375, 87 L.Ed. 1774 (1943).

Defendant’s second ground of appeal is that it was error to permit the government to introduce testimony of defendant’s bad reputation for truth and veracity. The testimony complained of was received in rebuttal after defendant had testified, but defendant contends that it was nonetheless inadmissible because it was really based upon specific acts of misconduct rather than upon the government witnesses’ knowledge of defendant’s general reputation. The witnesses themselves testified to the contrary, and we are not free to reject that testimony as untrue.

Defendant cannot complain of the testimony relating to his specific acts of misconduct since it was elicited from the witnesses by the defendant himself during cross-examination.

Affirmed.