Crolich v. United States
| Decision Date | 17 June 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. 13843,13847.,13843 |
| Parties | CROLICH et al. v. UNITED STATES. HOLMAN v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Bart B. Chamberlain, Jr., Mobile, Ala., for appellants Crolich and another.
W. C. Taylor, Mobile, Ala., for appellant Holman.
Percy C. Fountain, U. S. Atty., Mobile, Ala., for appellee.
Before HOLMES, STRUM, and RIVES, Circuit Judges.
The appellants were jointly indicted under Section 241, Title 18, of the United States Code, for conspiracy to injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate, citizens in the free exercise and enjoyment of rights and privileges secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States. A motion to dismiss the indictment for failure to state an offense under the laws of the United States, and a motion for a bill of particulars, were filed by each of the appellants, which motions were overruled. Thereupon, the appellants' pleas of not guilty (which had previously been entered) were withdrawn, and pleas of nolo contendere were entered by them. The court postponed the imposition of sentences until a later date, when one of the defendants was sentenced to imprisonment for 18 months, and to pay a fine of $2000; each of the others was sentenced to imprisonment for a year and a day, and to pay a fine of $750; and every one of them was ordered to stand committed until his fine was paid.
The indictment charges that on or about January 1, 1950, and continuously thereafter until December 14, 1950, when the indictment was filed, the appellants and divers other persons feloniously conspired to injure citizens of the United States in the free exercise and enjoyment of their right to vote for legally qualified persons for the offices of United States Senator and United States Representative in Congress from Alabama, in a primary election to be held on May 2, 1950, in the State of Alabama, as an integral part of the procedure provided by the statutes of Alabama for the election of United States Senators and Congressmen; that it was a part of said conspiracy to obstruct, prevent, and hinder, legally qualified citizens from voting in that election, and to cause disqualified persons to impersonate qualified citizens and to vote in their place; that it was a part of said conspiracy to cast false, forged, and fictitious votes, at said primary election, with the intent that said illegal votes should be counted and thus should dilute, diminish, and destroy, the value and effect of votes legally cast, with the further purpose of causing the election officers to make a false return and certification of the results of said election.
Said Section 241 of Title 18 is an anomaly in the federal code of crimes, 1950 Revised Edition; and it is sui generis in the federal law of conspiracy. Ordinarily, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful thing or to do a lawful thing by unlawful means. Yet it is not a substantive federal crime to do what said Section 241 makes it a federal crime to conspire to do. Under Section 19 of the Enforcement Act of May 31, 1870, 16 Stat. 140, 144, the substantive offenses that appellants were charged with conspiring to commit would have been federal offenses, but that feature of the law was repealed by the Act of February 8, 1894, 28 Stat. 36, leaving Section 6 in force, which is now Section 241, Title 18, of the United States Code. In United States v. Saylor, 322 U.S. 385, at page. 389, 64 S.Ct. 1101 at page 1104, 88 L.Ed. 1341, the court said that said section could hardly have been inadvertently left on the statute books, and added: "Perhaps Congress thought it had an application other than that given it by this court in the Mosley case."
In United States v. Mosley, 238 U.S. 383, 35 S.Ct. 904, 905, 59 L.Ed. 1355, after holding said section to be constitutional and validly to extend some protection "at least" to the right to vote for members of Congress, the court added: "We regard it as equally unquestionable that the right to have one's vote counted is as open to protection by Congress as the right to put a ballot in a box." The court then traced the history of the legislation, and reached the conclusion that Section 19 protected personal rights of a citizen, including the right to cast his ballot and have it honestly counted. In United States v. Saylor, supra, 322 U.S. at pages 389 and 390, 64 S.Ct. 1101, the court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Peel v. State
...that no offense is charged in the indictment.' See also 22 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 425(4), Effect of Plea, p. 1205. In Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879 (5th Cir.), the United States Court of Appeals held: 'A plea of nolo contendere, like a plea of guilty, leaves open for review only the......
-
Dow v. State
...35 Ill.App.2d 228, 182 N.E.2d 387. See also, Hudson v. United States, 1926, 47 S.Ct. 127, 272 U.S. 451, 71 L.Ed. 347; Crolich v. United States, 1952, 5th Cir., 196 F.2d 879, cert. den. 344 U.S. 830, 73 S.Ct. 36, 97 L.Ed. If no crime is charged in the indictment, no lawful sentence can be im......
-
Martin v. State, 88-155
...358 U.S. 878, 79 S.Ct. 125, 3 L.Ed.2d 109 (1958), judgment aff'd 359 U.S. 271, 79 S.Ct. 763, 3 L.Ed.2d 800 (1959); Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879 (5th Cir.), cert. denied 344 U.S. 830, 73 S.Ct. 36, 97 L.Ed. 646 (1952). The rule is stated by Wright, Federal Practice & Procedure: Crim......
-
State v. Stokes, 248
...293; United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. United States, 330 U.S. 395, 67 S.Ct. 775, 91 L.Ed. 973; Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879, reh. den. 17 June 1952, cert. den. 344 U.S. 830, 73 S.Ct. 36, 97 L.Ed. 646; 21 Am.Jur.2d Criminal Law § 501; 22 C.J.S. Criminal La......
-
Election law violations.
...States, 228 F.2d 544 (4th Cir. 1955). (64.) DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 3, at 38; see also Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879 (5th Cir. (65.) DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 3, at 38; see also Ryan v. United States, 99 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1938); Walker v. Unit......
-
Election law violations.
...228 F.2d 544, 547-48 (4th Cir. 1955). (64.) DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 3, at 38; see also Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879, 880 (5th Cir. (65.) DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 3, at 38; see also Ryan v. United States, 99 F.2d 864, 870 (8th Cir. 1938); Walk......
-
Election Law Violations
...Weston, 417 F.2d 181, 183 (4th Cir. 1969). 287. DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 1, at 35; see also Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879, 880 (5th Cir. 1952). 288. DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 1, at 35; see also Ryan v. United States, 99 F.2d 864, 866 (8th Cir. 1......
-
Election law violations.
...228 F.2d 544, 547-48 (4th Cir. 1955). (64.) DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 3, at 38; see also Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879, 880 (5th Cir. (65.) DOJ ELECTION PROSECUTION MANUAL, supra note 3, at 38; see also Ryan v. United States, 99 F.2d 864, 870 (8th Cir. 1938); Walk......