United States v. Jones
Decision Date | 21 March 1960 |
Docket Number | No. 20593.,20593. |
Citation | 182 F. Supp. 146 |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Robert Lester JONES and Mary Jane Jones, Defendants. |
Edward L. Scheufler, U. S. Atty., O. J. Taylor, Asst. U. S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., for plaintiff.
Roger J. Barbieri, Kansas City, Mo. (court-appointed), for defendants.
In this criminal action the Government seeks to bring certain "credit sales slips" within the ambit of Section 2314, Title 18 U.S.C.A. by claiming the same to be a "security" within the definition of that term as found in Section 2311, Title 18 U.S.C.A.
The information in this case contains four counts. Counts I and II charge the defendant Robert Lester Jones with knowingly transporting and causing "to be transported in interstate commerce * * * a certain falsely made and forged security, to-wit, Montgomery Ward credit sales slip Number 1205-32, in the amount of $33.90, bearing the falsely made and forged signature of Jim B. Loftus * * * well knowing the same to have been falsely made and forged * * *." Counts III and IV present similar charges against the defendant Mary Jane Jones. The parties have formally waived trial by Jury and agreed that the issues shall be determined by the Court on the basis of the following stipulation of facts:
In light of the above agreed statement of facts; and the charges alleged in the several counts of the information, it is conceded that the only issue here for determination, to establish the guilt or innocence of the defendants, is the question of whether or not the "credit sales slips" described in each count of the information constitute a "security" within the meaning of the above statutes. In light of the ruling hereinafter made, that limitation of issue by the parties may be accepted, although there may also be an issue respecting "interstate commerce" which we do not reach, before guilt could be pronounced under the facts stipulated.
The "credit sales slip" which the Government contends is a "security" as defined in Section 2311, supra, may be described as follows: It has the name "Montgomery Ward" printed at the top, with a sales slip number directly opposite thereto. In a space designated "Charge to" appears the imprint of a credit charge-plate issued by Montgomery Ward in the name of one "Jim B. Loftus, 9236 Noland Rd., Lena, Kansas," bearing number "0331-801T." Thereafter, there is described on the slip a sale of merchandise that carried a specific article number and unit price, which, together with added sales tax and a "time price," reveals a total sale of $33.90. In the center of such document appears the printed notation, "customer's signature" and opposite thereto appears, in writing, the name "Jim B. Loftus." Such is the form of document alleged in each count of the information and established by the evidence which the defendants are charged with transporting in interstate commerce; and which the Government asserts is an "evidence of indebtedness" defined as a "security" by Section 2311, supra.
Because the type of document or instrument here involved is quite common to the present-day system of merchandising; because the theft and unauthorized use of credit cards has become quite common and has resulted in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Merrill v. United States
...States v. Crouch (D.C.Del., 1964), 224 F.Supp. 969; United States v. Fordyce (S.D.Cal., 1961), 192 F.Supp. 93; United States v. Jones (W.D.Mo., 1960), 182 F.Supp. 146; United States v. Young (W.D.Mo., 1962), 210 F.Supp. 640. See also: Lewis v. United States (10 Cir., 1962), 301 F.2d 787; In......
-
Lewis v. United States
...of § 2314, and specifically involving the use of credit cards, appears to be limited to four district court cases. In United States v. Jones, W.D.Mo., 182 F.Supp. 146, the charge was the transportation of a falsely made security, to wit: a "credit sales slip." The question presented to the ......
-
United States v. Crouch
...it is nothing more than "evidence of a sale" and reference to the credit card is required to establish liability, United States v. Jones, 182 F. Supp. 146, 149 (Mo.W.D.1960); that a charge voucher stating "address correspondence regarding this charge" to seller lacks the indispensable requi......
-
Beam v. United States
...Courts have divided on the question dealt with here. In general accord with the Merrill and Barack view we find: United States v. Jones, 182 F. Supp. 146 (W.D.Mo., 1960); United States v. Fordyce, 192 F.Supp. 93 (S.D. Cal., 1961); United States v. Young, 210 F.Supp. 640 (W.D.Mo., 1962); Uni......