Ledford v. United States, 10076.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit) |
| Citation | 155 F.2d 574 |
| Docket Number | No. 10076.,10076. |
| Parties | LEDFORD et al. v. UNITED STATES. |
| Decision Date | 31 May 1946 |
155 F.2d 574 (1946)
LEDFORD et al.
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 10076.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
May 31, 1946.
Harry B. Miller, of Lexington, Ky. (Harry B. Miller, of Lexington, Ky., James Sampson, of Harlan, Ky., and Golden & Lay, of Pineville, Ky., on the brief), for appellants.
R. M. Stephenson, of Lexington, Ky. (Claude P. Stephens and Robert M. Stephenson, both of Lexington, Ky., on the brief), for appellee.
Before SIMONS, MARTIN, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
MARTIN, Circuit Judge.
The four appellants were indicted, convicted and sentenced for violation of Section 19 of the Criminal Code, Title 18, U.S.C.A. § 51, which penalizes conspiracy by two or more persons "to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any citizen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States." The Supreme Court has held that this section of the Criminal Code embraces the right of a voter in a Congressional election to have his vote honestly counted, and is violated by a conspiracy of election officials to stuff a ballot box in an election to choose a United States Senator. United States v.
Appellants were charged with unlawful and fraudulent acts in holding an election in Mary Helen Precinct, No. 39-A, in Harlan County, Kentucky. In that election, a United States Senator and a Congressman for the district were to be chosen. Appellants Metcalf and Lint were election judges; Ledford, election clerk; and Brock, election sheriff, for the precinct. The paraphernalia to be used in conducting the election was delivered to Ledford as election clerk. Ledford receipted the County Court Clerk of Harlan County for the paraphernalia, described in the receipt as consisting of "one ballot box, empty and securely locked by three Yale locks, book, sample ballots, instruction cards, `unused' rubber stamp, stencils, ink pads, election seal, sealing wax, large envelope and other supplies, including precinct register containing `copy' registration records, and three typewritten copies of names and addresses of voters."
After the election, Ledford and Brock delivered to the County Court Clerk the ballot box, containing the official ballots deposited in it, and the other material used in the election in Mary Helen Precinct, No. 39-A. The ballots, apparently officially cast, contained in the ballot box were signed by Ledford, election clerk, and Lint, election judge. From the stub book which originally contained the official ballots, 411 ballots had been removed. The report of the election commissioners who made the official count certified that 411 ballots had been cast for United States Senator, 371 of which were for Chandler, the Democratic candidate, and 39 for Colbert, the Republican candidate. One ballot was marked "spoiled." Robsion, who had no opposition for Congressman, received 410 votes.
The argument of the attorney for appellants that there was insufficient proof to establish the guilt of the defendants is without reasonable foundation. Metcalf, election judge, and the other three appellants endorsed warrants issued by the County Court Clerk and drawn on the Treasurer of Harlan County, Kentucky, for their services as election officials. It is logical to infer that they actually served as such. There was evidence to support a fair inference that appellants had removed from the stub book the blank ballots which had not been voted and had marked and cast them fraudulently in the names of numerous persons, many of whom were not legally qualified voters, some of whom were dead, others absent by reason of service in the armed forces of the United States, some sick, and others for various reasons not in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Anderson v. United States 8212 346, No. 73
...1341 (1944); United States v. Kantor, 78 F.2d 710 (CA2 1935); Walker v. United States, 93 F.2d 383 (CA8 1937); Ledford v. United States, 155 F.2d 574 (CA6), cert. denied, 329 U.S. 733, 67 S.Ct. 96, 91 L.Ed. 634 (1946). 1. See United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 753—754, 86 S.Ct. 1170, 117......
-
United States v. Morado, 71-1309.
...175 success, obtained illegitimate absentee ballots. See Fields v. United States, 228 F.2d 544 (4th Cir. 1955); Ledford v. United States, 155 F.2d 574 (6th Cir. Passing to the second step of our consideration of the evidence— which of the defendants were established to have been members of ......
-
Dodson v. United States, 12070.
...fact it often must. Glasser v. United States, 1942, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680; Ledford v. United States, 6 Cir., 1946, 155 F.2d 574, certiorari denied 329 U.S. 733, 67 S.Ct. 96, 91 L.Ed. 634; Van Huss v. United States, 10 Cir., 1952, 197 F.2d 120. Upon this evidence, we ca......
-
U.S. v. Daughtry, 74-1701
...officials. The ballots were admissible to carry only such weight as the jury chose to give them. Ledford v. United States, 6 Cir., 1946, 155 F.2d 574, 576, cert. denied, 329 U.S. 733, 67 S.Ct. 96, 91 L.Ed. 4 Very well, members of the jury, it looks like crime pays. That kind of verdict is b......