Duke v. United States
Citation | 81 L.Ed. 1243,57 S.Ct. 835,301 U.S. 492 |
Decision Date | 24 May 1937 |
Docket Number | No. 907,907 |
Parties | DUKE v. UNITED STATES |
Court | United States Supreme Court |
Mr. Jesse C. Duke, pro se.
Mr. Wm. W. Barron, of Washington, D.C., for the United States.
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?
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.'
* * *
Section 335 of the Criminal Code, c. 321, 35 Stat. 1088, 1152 (18 U.S.C.A. § 541), before its amendment, provided:
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-
United States v. Walker, Crim. A. No. 80-486.
...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
...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
...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
...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. ......
-
General principles
...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). ...