Duke v. United States

Citation81 L.Ed. 1243,57 S.Ct. 835,301 U.S. 492
Decision Date24 May 1937
Docket NumberNo. 907,907
PartiesDUKE v. UNITED STATES
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Mr. Jesse C. Duke, pro se.

Mr. Wm. W. Barron, of Washington, D.C., for the United States.

Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND delivered the opinion of the Court.

The court below, being divided and in doubt, and desiring the instruction and advice of this court, has certified the following questions of law:

'1. May a misdemeanor, for which no infamous punishment is prescribed, be prosecuted by information, where the punishment therefor may exceed $500 fine or six months' imprisonment, without hard labor, or both?

'2. May an offense under section 137 of the Criminal Code (18 U.S.C.A. § 243) be prosecuted by information?'

The certificate contains the following statement of facts:

'This was a prosecution for violation of section 137 of the Criminal Code, 18 U.S.C.A. § 243, which provides:

"Whoever shall attempt to influence the action or decision of any grand or petit juror of any court of the United States upon any issue or matter pending before such juror, or before the jury of which he is a member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing or sending to him any letter or any communication, in print or writing, in relation to such issue or matter, shall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.'

'The prosecution was by information filed under oath by the United States Attorney. The appellant was convicted of the offense charged and from judgment and sentence thereon appeals to this court. One of the questions presented by the appeal is whether the offense charged, which is punishable by six months imprisonment or fine of $1,000, or both, may be prosecuted by information, in view of section 335 of the Criminal Code (amended by Act Dec. 16, 1930, 18 U.S.C.A. § 541). * * *

'Notwithstanding the decision in Thorm v. United States (C.C.A.3rd) 59 F.(2d) 419, certiorari denied 287 U.S. 624, 53 S.Ct. 78, 77 L.Ed. 541, this court is divided and in doubt as to whether a misdemeanor may be prosecuted by information where the punishment therefor, although not infamous, may exceed a fine of five hundred dollars, or six months' imprisonment without hard labor, or both. As there are a large number of such misdemeanors denounced by the Criminal Code (see Hearings before House Judiciary Committee, Seventieth Congress, First Session, January 17, 1928, on H.R. 5608, H.R. 8230, H.R. 8555, H.R. 8556, Serial 1, Page 31) the court deems the question of sufficient importance to certify to the Supreme Court.'

Section 335 of the Criminal Code, c. 321, 35 Stat. 1088, 1152 (18 U.S.C.A. § 541), before its amendment, provided: 'All offenses which may be punished by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, shall be deemed felonies. All other offenses shall be deemed misdemeanors.'

This section was amended by the Act of December 16, 1930, c. 15, 46 Stat. 1029, 18 U.S.C. § 541 (18 U.S.C.A. § 541), by adding the following proviso: 'Provided, That all offenses the penalty for which does not exceed confinement in a common jail, without hard labor for a period of six months, or a fine of not more than $500, or both, shall be deemed to be petty offenses; and all such petty offenses may be prosecuted upon information or complaint.'

Appellant contends that this language limits the authority to prosecute by information strictly to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
40 cases
  • United States v. Walker, Crim. A. No. 80-486.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana
    • 7 Mayo 1981
    ...may proceed under a bill of information rather than an indictment on a misdemeanor charge. F.R.Crim.P. 7(a); Duke v. United States, 301 U.S. 492, 57 S.Ct. 835, 81 L.Ed. 1243 (1937); 1 C. Wright, supra, § 121, at 212. Rule 7(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure states without qualif......
  • U.S. v. Ramirez
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 16 Septiembre 1976
    ...penalty provisions. (See Dorszynski v. United States (1974) 418 U.S. 424, 94 S.Ct. 3042, 41 L.Ed.2d 855.)3 In Duke v. United States (1937) 301 U.S. 492, 57 S.Ct. 835, 81 L.Ed. 1243, the Court considered whether the statute creating the class of petty offenses implied a requirement that misd......
  • Russell v. United States Shelton v. United States Whitman v. United States Liveright v. United States Price v. United States Gojack v. United States 8212 12, 128, s. 8
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 21 Mayo 1962
    ...We need not pause to consider whether an offense under 2 U.S.C. § 192, 2 U.S.C.A. § 192 is an 'infamous crime,' Duke v. United States, 301 U.S. 492, 57 S.Ct. 835, 81 L.Ed. 1243, since Congress has from the beginning explicitly conferred upon those prosecuted under the statute the protection......
  • American Tobacco Co. v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 26 Marzo 1945
    ...1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, may be prosecuted by information. Falconi v. United States, 6 Cir., 280 F. 766. See Duke v. United States, 301 U.S. 492, 57 S. Ct. 835, 81 L.Ed. 1243; and the foregoing rule is not rendered nugatory by Title 18 U.S.C.A. § 753f, as contended. See United States v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • General principles
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Federal Criminal Practice
    • 30 Abril 2022
    ...18 U.S.C. §19. Congress subdivided misdemeanors by creating a class of misdemeanors of minor gravity. Duke v. United States , 301 U.S. 492, 494-95 (1937). ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT