Quarles v. United States

• Decision Date: 29 June 1921
• Docket Number: 3537
• Citation: Quarles v. United States, 274 F. 203 (6th Cir. 1921)
• Parties: QUARLES v. UNITED STATES.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

274 F. 203

QUARLES v. UNITED STATES.

No. 3537

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 29, 1921

Joe V Williams, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for plaintiff in error.

W. T Kennerly, U.S. Atty., of Knoxville, Tenn.

Before KNAPPEN, DENISON, and DONAHUE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error seeks a review of his conviction of violation of section 4 of the Act of June 25, 1910 (U.S Comp. St. Sec. 8815), known as the White Slave Act. The specific charge of the indictment, upon which, under the evidence, the conviction must have rested, was that he induced the girl named, being under the age of 18, to go and be transported by railroad across the state line for the purpose of debauchery. Upon the trial there was no request by the respondent for any instructions to the jury, nor was there any exception to the charge of the court. The record shows no question raised in any way in the court below, save by motion for new trial.

The substantial complaint now made by the present counsel for Quarles is that the evidence did not justify a conviction. Upon that complaint he has no right to be heard. As this court said in Lockhart v. United States (C.C.A.) 264 F. 14, 16 'No motion was made for an instructed verdict, either at the conclusion of the government's evidence or at the conclusion of the case, and no exception whatever was taken to the charge, which carefully instructed. * * * The defendant, therefore, has no right to be heard in this court upon the contention that there was no evidence. His counsel with the proof fresh in mind, acquiesced in the implied ruling that the questions were for the jury. The point was first raised on motion for new trial, and that was too late.'

As pointed out in the case just cited and in Sylvia v. United States (C.C.A.) 264 F. 593, 594, an appellate court, under such circumstances, will interfere if it is satisfied, and only if it is satisfied, that there has been a miscarriage of justice. Upon this record we are not led to that conclusion. The age of the girl, her travel by common carrier across the state line to keep appointments with Quarles, the ensuing debauchery, and his constant intent that their meetings should be for that purpose-- all are clearly shown by the evidence which the jury believed. His guilt of the offense denounced by this statute depends wholly upon whether he 'induced' the making of the trips.

It is his contention that to '...