Scott v. United States
Decision Date | 08 July 1935 |
Docket Number | No. 1267.,1267. |
Citation | 78 F.2d 791 |
Parties | SCOTT v. UNITED STATES. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
Hugh B. Woodward, of Albuquerque, N. M. (Woodward & Wilson and K. Gill Shaffer, all of Albuquerque, N. M., on the brief), for appellant.
William J. Barker, U. S. Atty., of Santa Fe, N. M., for the United States.
Before PHILLIPS, McDERMOTT, and BRATTON, Circuit Judges.
The indictment herein charged that Scott and others on July 31, 1934, in the District of New Mexico "unlawfully, * * * and feloniously had in their possession or custody * * * a still * * * set up and in operation, which * * * was not registered with the Collector of Internal Revenue of the aforesaid District and as required by law."
It was challenged by demurrer on the ground that it failed to allege facts constituting a crime against the United States. The demurrer was overruled, and Scott was tried, convicted and sentenced.
26 USCA § 281 (Rev. St. § 3258, 15 St. 126, 17 St. 401, 402), reads as follows:
This section was repealed by the National Prohibition Act, 27 USCA §§ 1-89. United States v. Yuginovich, 256 U. S. 450, 41 S. Ct. 551, 65 L. Ed. 1043; United States v. Stafoff, 260 U. S. 477, 43 S. Ct. 197, 67 L. Ed. 358. It was re-enacted by the Act of November 23, 1921, 27 USCA, Sec. 3 (42 St. 223). United States v. Stafoff, supra.
Section 4, Act of March 3, 1927, the Prohibition Reorganization Act, 5 USCA § 281c (44 Stat. 1382) reads as follows:
Art. 18 of Regulations No. 3 promulgated by the Prohibition Commissioner on October 1, 1927, required "proprietors, * * * distillers and all others who set up stills" to register them with the prohibition administrator. See United States v. Dibella (C. C. A. 2) 28 F.(2d) 805.
Sections 3 (a) and 5 (a) of the Prohibition Reorganization Act of 1930, 27 USCA, §§ 103 (a) and section 5 (a), as amended by Act March 31, 1933, 27 USCA § 105 (a), read as follows:
Art. 14 of Regulations No. 3 prescribed jointly by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General, effective April 1, 1931, in part reads as follows:
"Every person, including the proprietor of an industrial-alcohol plant, having in his...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Meany
...Mills, Inc., 18 F.R.D. 91; Roberson v. United States (5 Cir.) 249 F.2d 737, 72 A.L.R.2d 434.5 Cited with approval in Scott v. United States (10 Cir.) 78 F.2d 791.6 State v. Cook, 212 Minn. 495, 4 N.W.2d 323; State v. Clow, 215 Minn. 380, 10 N.W.2d 359; State v. Bolsinger, 221 Minn. 154, 21 ......
-
Czarnecki v. United States
...2 Cir., 29 F.2d 694; Silva v. United States, 9 Cir., 35 F.2d 598; Connley et al. v. United States, 9 Cir., 46 F.2d 53; Scott v. United States, 10 Cir., 78 F.2d 791; Benton v. United States, 4 Cir., 80 F.2d 162. We refer particularly to the note upon this subject by Judge Soper to the opinio......
-
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. McIlvaine
... ... Petitioner seeks review of decisions of the United States Board of Tax Appeals denying petitioner's contention that the taxable estate comprises a ... ...