History
  • No items yet
midpage
421 F.2d 836
5th Cir.
1970
PER CURIAM:

We have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument. Accordingly, we have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing of this fact. See Huth v. Southern Pac. Co., 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526, Part I; Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I.

Francisco Marizal was convicted on a two count indictment for violating Sections 4704(a) and 4705(a) of Title 26, United States Code. On appeal, Marizal argues that the district court abused its discretion by taking judicial notice of the fact that heroin is a narcotic drug. We hold that the district court correctly took judicial notice of this fact. Accordingly, there was no abuse of discretion. See generally James v. United States, 5 Cir. 1922, 279 F. Ill, 112.

The judgment is affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. Francisco Marizal
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Date Published: Feb 2, 1970
Citations: 421 F.2d 836; 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 10918; 27898_1
Docket Number: 27898_1
Court Abbreviation: 5th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified
and are not legal advice.
Log In