Court Opinion

ID: 9457337
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 20:18:59.899981+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:18.366303
License: Public Domain

MOORE, Circuit Judge
(concurring):
In my opinion, the Trial Court was justified in finding that a conspiracy existed in fact. Hysohion in Rimbaud's presence told Everett that “they” could supply him with drugs. The ways and means were communicated by them to Everett. Rimbaud’s subsequent offer to provide two kilograms by these same ways and means, say the majority, “does not necessarily imply that there was an agreement between the seller, who was Roupinian, and Rimbaud.” Of course, the facts do not “necessarily” imply an agreement but they do not “necessarily” imply that there was no arrangement between them. In other words, I would accept the Trial Court’s conclusion from the evidence.
The artificiality of the presumption body of law as to knowledge of illegal importation is apparent from the many conflicting decisions on this subject. Section 174 has now been repealed. Little value, therefore, is to be found in trying to fit the facts here disclosed into one of the various molds cast in other cases. The Trial Court derived one inference from the facts, the majority here another. Specific knowledge that *349the drugs were illegally imported was not presented. Nor will I quarrel with the majority’s conclusion that the proof of constructive possession was probably too weak to support such a finding. I, therefore, dubitante concur.