What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. Your task is to identify the type of district court decision or judgment appealed from (i.e., the nature of the decision below in the district court).

Opinion:
Lorenzo WHITE, Joyce Harper and Ruby Fields, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 15667.
United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.
April 11, 1958.
Rehearing Denied June 25, 1958.
Robert J. McNealy, Everett W. Hepp, Fairbanks, Alaska, for appellants.
George M. Yeager, U. S. Atty., Paula A. Tennant, Asst. U. S. Atty., Fairbanks, Alaska, for appellee.
Before MATHEWS, HEALY and LEMMON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
On May 25, 1956, appellants (Lorenzo White, Joyce Harper and Ruby Fields) and others were indicted in the District Court for the Territory of Alaska. The indictment was in seven counts. Count 1 charged appellants with having violated § 4724(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. § 4724(b). Count 2 charged appellants with having violated 21 U.S.C.A. § 174. Counts 3 and 7 charged appellants with having violated 18 U.S.C.A. § 371. Counts 4 and 5 did not charge any of the appellants with any offense. Count 6 charged Fields with having violated 18 U.S.C.A. § 1716, but did not charge White or Harper with any offense. Appellants were arraigned, pleaded not guilty, had a jury trial, were found guilty as charged, were sentenced and have appealed. Appellants’ brief contains no specification of errors. We have examined the record and have found no reversible error.
Judgments affirmed.
. Also known as Ruby Jeanette Fields, as Ruby Mayfield and as Pearline Adams.
. Penalties for violating § 4724(b) are prescribed in § 7237 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.
. Three judgments were entered — one sentencing White, one sentencing Harper, one sentencing Melds.
. Our Rule 18, 28 U.S.C.A. provides:
“1. Counsel for the appellant shall file with the clerk of this court 20 copies of a printed brief * * *
“2. This brief shall contain * * *
“(d) In all cases a specification of errors relied upon which shall be numbered and shall set out separately and particularly each error intended to be urged. * * * »

Question: What is the type of district court decision or judgment appealed from (i.e., the nature of the decision below in the district court)?

Choices:
Trial (either jury or bench trial)
Injunction or denial of injunction or stay of injunction
Summary judgment or denial of summary judgment
Guilty plea or denial of motion to withdraw plea
Dismissal (include dismissal of petition for habeas corpus)
Appeals of post judgment orders (e.g., attorneys' fees, costs, damages, JNOV - judgment nothwithstanding the verdict)
Appeal of post settlement orders
Not a final judgment: interlocutory appeal
Not a final judgment: mandamus
Other (e.g., pre-trial orders, rulings on motions, directed verdicts) or could not determine nature of final judgment
Does not fit any of the above categories, but opinion mentions a "trial judge"
Not applicable (e.g., decision below was by a federal administrative agency, tax court)

Answer: 0