United States of Am., & v. Terrence Dawson, &, 469 F.2d 64 (9th Cir. 1972). · Go Syfert
United States of Am., & v. Terrence Dawson, &, 469 F.2d 64 (9th Cir. 1972). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: United States v. Contreras-Vergara (ca9, 2026-02-06)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Contreras-Vergara
9th Cir. · 2026 · signal: see · confidence high
For one thing, “the government does not have the burden of disproving each element of derivative citizenship; only ‘alienage’ is among the elements of the crime, so only it must be proven.” United States v. Sandoval-Gonzalez, 642 F.3d 717, 724 (9th Cir. 2011) (emphasis in original); see United States v. Dawson, 469 F.2d 64, 64 (9th Cir. 1972) (per curiam) (explaining that evidence of alienage was sufficient even though “it is possible the [defendants] [] were dual citizens of Mexico and the United States,” because “it was not necessary for the government to negative all possible …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff and Appellee,
v.
Terrence DAWSON, Defendant and Appellant
71-2447.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Aug 10, 1972.
469 F.2d 64
Stanley H. Tibbs (argued), Fresno, Cal., for defendant-appellant., Shelby R. Gott, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Stephen G. Nelson, Asst. U. S. Atty., Harry Steward, U. S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Chambers, Koelsch, Byrne.
Published
PER CURIAM:

The judgment of conviction in this case of smuggling aliens into the United States is affirmed.

Without objection, the aliens brought into the United States by Dawson testified they were citizens of Mexico. Now it is argued that it is possible the persons transported were dual citizens of Mexico and of the United States.

On the facts here, we conclude that the testimony was properly received, was sufficient to support the verdict, and that it was not necessary for the government to negative all possible situations that could have impaired the status. It is noted there was no cross examination.