Court Opinion

ID: 9464324
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 23:30:40.27483+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:38:34.527535
License: Public Domain

TIMBERS, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in the judgment of affirmance on the ground that, when a jury returns a general verdict of guilty on an indictment charging several acts in the conjunctive, the verdict stands if the evidence is sufficient *364with respect to any of the acts charged, as it was here with respect to the charge that Droms had understated his income. Turner v. United States, 396 U.S. 398, 420 (1970); United States v. Conti, 361 F.2d 153, 158 (2 Cir. 1966) (Moore, J.), vacated on other grounds, 390 U.S. 204 (1968).
Since in my view no more is needed to justify affirmance of the judgment of conviction, I respectfully dissent from the balance of the opinion which, being largely dictum, is without precedential force.