Blain v. United States
| Citation | 22 F.2d 393 |
| Decision Date | 13 October 1927 |
| Docket Number | No. 7783.,7783. |
| Parties | BLAIN v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit) |
Donald G. Hughes, of Minneapolis, Minn. (J. L. Sullivan, of Jayton, Tex., on the brief), for plaintiff in error.
Ray C. Fountain, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Des Moines, Iowa (Ross R. Mowry, U. S. Atty., of Newton, Iowa, and Frank F. Wilson, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Mt. Ayr, Iowa, on the brief), for the United States.
Before WALTER H. SANBORN and BOOTH, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, District Judge.
This is a writ of error to a judgment of conviction under section 2 of the White Slave Traffic Act (36 Stat. 825; U. S. C. tit. 18, § 398 18 USCA § 398). Although defendant pleaded guilty to the charge contained in the single count of the indictment, yet by writ of error he could properly raise the question whether the indictment charged any offense against the United States. 16 C. J. p. 402, § 738; Hocking Valley Ry. Co. v. United States (C. C. A.) 210 F. 735, 738.
The charging part of the indictment reads as follows:
"That one Lovel A. Blain, on or about the 11th day of September, A. D. 1926, did unlawfully, willfully, knowingly, and feloniously transport and cause to be transported, and aid and assist in obtaining transportation for, and in transporting a certain woman, to wit, Willie Bragg, from the city of Amarillo in the state of Texas, to the city of Des Moines in the state of Iowa, that is to say, from the city of Amarillo in the state of Texas, to the Central division of the Southern district of Iowa, a point within the jurisdiction of this court, for the purpose of prostitution and debauchery, to wit, then and there the said Lovel A. Blain and Willie Bragg to have unlawful sexual intercourse, the said Lovel A. Blain and Willie Bragg being not married, and with the intent and purpose on the part of the said Lovel A. Blain to induce, entice, and compel the said Willie Bragg to give herself up to the practice of prostitution and debauchery, and other immoral practices, to wit, then and there the said Lovel A. Blain and Willie Bragg to have unlawful sexual intercourse, the said Lovel A. Blain and Willie Bragg being not married, and whereby the said woman, Willie Bragg, was transported in interstate commerce from the said town of Amarillo, Texas, to the city of Des Moines, Iowa."
The second section of the statute under which the indictment was found reads, so far as here material, as follows:
"That any person who shall knowingly transport or cause to be transported, or aid or assist in obtaining transportation for, or in transporting, in interstate * * * commerce, * * * any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, * * * or with the intent and purpose to induce, entice, or compel such woman or girl to become a prostitute or to give herself up to debauchery, or to engage in any other immoral practice, * * * whereby any such woman or girl shall be transported in interstate * * * commerce, * * * shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished. * * *"
It is apparent that the indictment follows closely the wording of the statute. In statutory crimes, where the statute sets forth fully the ingredients of the crime, an indictment which follows the wording of the statute is sufficient, provided the ingredients are set forth with the requisite particularity. Huffman v. United States, 259 F. 35, 37 (C. C. A. 8); Thorn v. United States, 278 F. 932 (C. C. A. 8). We think the indictment fulfilled these requirements.
It is contended by defendant that the mode of travel should have been set out. This was not necessary under section 2 of the act (Wilson v. United States, 232 U. S. 563, 34 S. Ct. 347, 58 L. Ed. 728); and the fact that a common carrier was not mentioned shows that the indictment was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mellor v. United States
...and the indictment framed in the language of the statute is sufficient against attack on the constitutional grounds. Blain v. United States, 8 Cir., 22 F.2d 393; United States v. Hunt, 7 Cir., 120 F.2d 592, certiorari denied, 314 U. S. 625, 62 S.Ct. 97, 86 L.Ed. 502; Hughes v. United States......
-
United States v. Mellor
...effect (infra). The exact issue now before the court was determined adversely to the present defendants' contention in Blain v. United States, 8 Cir., 22 F.2d 393, 395, from which the following quotation is offered: "Finally, it is contended that the indictment was void for duplicity. One o......
-
La Page v. United States, 12863.
...such necessity exists in section 2, § 398, U.S.C.A. Title 18 (Coltabellotta v. United States, 2 Cir., 45 F.2d 117, 119; Blain v. United States, 8 Cir., 22 F.2d 393, 395) but the sections are distinct also irrespective of the common carrier feature and this distinction is between "causing to......
-
United States v. Pape, 385.
...The suggestion that the government must prove absence of marriage hardly can be intended seriously. Even if, contrary to Blain v. United States, 8 Cir., 22 F.2d 393, 395, the burden of proving such a negative should be held to rest upon the prosecution, there are many subordinate facts here......