Campbell v. United States, 5896.
| Decision Date | 19 February 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 5896.,5896. |
| Parties | CAMPBELL v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Lloyd C. Hooks and R. A. Hendricks, both of Miami, Fla., for appellant.
W. P. Hughes, U. S. Atty., of Jacksonville, Fla.
Before FOSTER, Circuit Judge, and HUTCHESON and SIBLEY, District Judges.
Willard E. Campbell appeals from conviction of a charge of bringing into the United States certain aliens not lawfully entitled to enter.
The indictment charged that he brought them "into the United States from a foreign country, to-wit: Havana, Cuba, at Miami, Florida, by means of a certain vessel, to-wit: Speed Boat Number V-17400." The testimony was that the aliens were taken by automobile from Havana to a point on the Cuban coast, and there put on a boat called "The Betty," and transferred on the high seas to the speed boat V-17400, and by it carried to Miami. A fatal variance is claimed in that other means beside the boat V-17400 were used. No crime was committed by carrying the aliens from Havana, but only by carrying them into the United States at Miami. The indictment was seeking to aver the instrument of the crime, and properly named the V-17400 as such. There was no variance.
The aliens testified that Campbell, in Havana, offered to take them into the United States for $80 each, which they paid, and he took them to Miami, as above stated. Campbell admitted coming with them on the boats, but denied seeing them in Havana, or having anything to do with their coming to Miami. He was allowed to testify that he was in Cuba on lawful business concerning a boat there, and that he came home as he did because he was barred from entrance and exit by the Cuban authorities. This was undenied and apparently uncontested by the prosecution. Campbell offered many witnesses and many documents to prove circumstances tending to show that what he said about his going to Cuba several weeks before was true. None of them related to the return trip in the V-17400. On objection for irrelevancy, the court ruled thus: There was no abuse of discretion in thus limiting the trial to the real dispute.
On direct examination, Campbell voluntarily testified that he was then serving a term in the penitentiary for unlawful importation of liquors. The court, in charging, said: He afterwards added: "I meant to tell the jury that you are the judges of the credibility of the witnesses, and in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weaver v. United States
...Cir., 62 F.2d 78; Mercer v. United States, 3 Cir., 14 F.2d 281, 283; Jebbia v. United States, 4 Cir., 37 F.2d 343, 344; Campbell v. United States, 5 Cir., 47 F.2d 70, 71; 16 C.J. 1013, 1014; 70 C.J. Even assuming that the defendant's request should be treated as an exception to the general ......
-
Com. v. Bardascino
...the alien into the country: Emmanuel v. U.S., 5 Cir., 24 F.2d 905, certiorari denied, 278 U.S. 643, 49 S.Ct. 79, 73 L.Ed. 557; Campbell v. U.S., 5 Cir., 47 F.2d 70; a bawdy house inmate who relayed defendant's inquires to the proprietress is not an accomplice of a defendant transporting a g......
-
Pereira v. United States
...and the case was established by direct testimony if believed by the jury, 23 C.J.S., Criminal Law, § 1250; Campbell v. United States, 5 Cir., 47 F.2d 70, 71. Other requested charges were substantially covered by the court's oral charge or by given requested charges or were properly The evid......
-
Commonwealth v. Bardascino
...the country: Emmanuel v. U.S., 5 Cir., 24 F.2d 905, certiorari denied, 278 U.S. 643, 49 S.Ct. 79, 73 L.Ed. 557; Campbell v. U.S., 5 Cir., 47 F.2d 70; a bawdy house inmate who relayed defendant's inquires to the proprietress is not an accomplice of a defendant transporting a girl for purpose......