United States v. Illingworth, 73-1207.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit) |
| Citation | 489 F.2d 264 |
| Docket Number | No. 73-1207.,73-1207. |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Ronald Lee ILLINGWORTH, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 14 December 1973 |
489 F.2d 264 (1973)
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Ronald Lee ILLINGWORTH, Appellant.
No. 73-1207.
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted August 15, 1973.
Decided December 14, 1973.
Philip M. Jones, Lewis, Jones & Ellwood, Denver, Colo., for appellant.
Stephen M. Duncan, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty. (James L. Treece, U. S. Atty., with him on the brief), for appellee.
Before HILL, BARNES* and SETH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Ronald Lee Illingworth appeals from a jury verdict finding him guilty of having violated the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 842(a) (3), by unlawfully transporting explosives across state lines without a permit required by law. Illingworth appears to have taken an airplane flight from Pocatello, Idaho, to Salt Lake City, Utah, and then taken another flight from Salt Lake City to Denver, Colorado, while carrying a handbag containing dynamite. His expressed reason for this enterprise was to help his father blow up some tree stumps at the latter's farm in Iowa. He disclosed the contents of the bag to ticket agents at the Denver airport.
18 U.S.C. § 842 under which the prosecution was commenced is part of Chapter 40 of that title of the United States Code ; so, too, is section 845 of Title 18, which provides that:
"(a) Except in the case of subsections . . . of section 844 of this title, this chapter shall not apply to:
"(1) any aspect of the transportation of explosive materials via . . . air which are regulated by the United States Department of Transportation and agencies thereof; . . . ."
Thus the question arises whether appellant could be prosecuted under section 842 in the face of the above exception to its application. The exception refers to materials which are regulated by the Department, and not necessarily prohibited.
The Federal Aviation Administration is an agency of the Department of Transportation 49 U.S.C. § 1652(e) (1), and under 49 U.S.C. § 1421(a) (6), the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration is empowered and required to prescribe "such reasonable rules and regulations . . . governing other practices, methods and procedure, as he may find necessary to provide adequately for national security and safety in air commerce." This he has done. These regulations pertain to the carrying or transporting of explosives by civil aircraft in the United States. See 14 C.F.R. § 103.7 (1973) ; Underwriters at Lloyd's of London v. Cordova Airlines, Inc., 283 F. 2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Scharstein, Crim. No. 81-21.
...also 1966 U.S.Code Cong. and Adm.News, p. 4095. 14 See 1970 U.S.Code Cong. and Adm.News, p. 4007 et seq. 15 United States v. Batchelder, supra. 16United States v. Illingworth, 489 F.2d 264 (10th Cir. 1973), cited by defendants, is not contrary to the above analysis. In Illingworth, supra, t......
-
U.S. v. Ressam, No. CR99-666C (W.D. Wash. 4/3/2001), CR99-666C.
...offense. In United States v. Petrykievicz, 809 F. Supp. 794 (W.D. Wash. 1992),1a the Court, relying on United States v. Illingworth, 489 F.2d 264 (10th Cir. 1973), held that the 18 U.S.C. § 845 exception to 18 U.S.C. § 842 (a)(3)(A) and 844(a) is applicable when the Department of Transporta......
-
US v. Petrykievicz, CR92-290Z.
...Counts I and II, at 16. In effect, the defendant reads § 845(a)(1) as a preemption clause. The defendant relies on United States v. Illingworth, 489 F.2d 264 (10th Cir.1973), the only Circuit Court opinion to analyze the statutory exception involved here. In Illingworth, the defendant took ......
-
USA. v. Fiorillo, s. 97-10551
...and agencies thereof[.] 18 U.S.C. S 845(a)(1). 29. This also distinguishes Fiorillo's case from United States v. Illingworth, 489 F.2d 264 (10th Cir. 1973) (charge against defendant for transporting explosives without a license dismissed); United States v. Petrykievicz, 809 F. Supp. 794 (W.......