De Lemos v. United States
Decision Date | 03 January 1899 |
Docket Number | 767. |
Parties | DE LEMOS v. UNITED STATES. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
The indictment in this case reads as follows:
'The grand jurors of the United States, elected, impaneled, sworn and charged to inquire for the body of said Middle district of Alabama, upon their oaths do find and present 'That on the 28th day of May, A.D. 1895, in said Middle district of Alabama, before the finding of this indictment, and within the jurisdiction of said court, in the county of Lowndes, in said state, Ben De Lemos did unlawfully, feloniously, and falsely make and forge a certain obligation of the United States, to wit, a draft for money, to wit, for the sum of six hundred sixty-eight 40/100 dollars, drawn by an authorized officer of the United States, to wit, by D. A. Carpenter, United States pension agent, upon the assistant treasurer of the United States at New York, N.Y., and which said falsely made and forged obligation of the United States is in the words following, to wit:
'And he, the said Ben De Lemos, although he well knew the said draft and obligation was falsely made and forged, in this that the name of the payee thereof, to wit, the words 'Thomas Cook, his mark,' were forged in the indorsement thereon and thereto, yet he, the said Ben De Lemos, did...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Prussian v. United States
...C. A.) 298 F. 369, and Alvarado v. United States (C. C. A.) 9 F.(2d) 385. Cf. United States v. Jolly (D. C.) 37 F. 108; De Lemos v. United States (C. C. A.) 91 F. 497. Because of the conflict, the petition was not opposed by the government, although it suggested that the indictment might al......
-
Dell'Aira v. United States
...altering the weights stated in the bills of lading. In proving that charge there was no variance. The defendant cites De Lemos v. United States, 91 F. 497, 33 C. C. A. 655, and Gesell v. United States (C. C. A.) 1 F.(2d) 283. Neither case is in point. The first case presented no question of......
-
United States v. Brown
...the draft, amount to a forgery of the draft. Gesell v. United States, 8 Cir., 1 F.2d 283, is to the same effect. See also, De Lemos v. United States, 5 Cir., 91 F. 497. The appellant was shown to have obtained payment on the drafts fraudulently by using false, and falsely made, documents an......
-
United States v. Winters
...the following authorities: United States v. Jolly (D. C.) 37 F. 108; United States v. Albert (C. C.) 45 F. 552; De Lemos v. United States, 91 F. 497, 33 C. C. A. 655; Hamil v. United States (C. C. A.) 298 F. 369; Biskind v. United States (C. C. A.) 281 F. 47, 28 A. L. R. 1377, certiorari de......