United States v. Loew, 53.
| Decision Date | 05 February 1945 |
| Docket Number | No. 53.,53. |
| Citation | 145 F.2d 332 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. LOEW. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Abraham J. Gellinoff, of New York City (Irving J. Tell, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
James B. M. McNally, U. S. Atty., of New York City (Robert Mitchell and Thomas K. Fisher, Asst. U. S. Attys., both of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.
Before L. HAND, SWAN, and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
Writ of Certiorari Denied February 5, 1945. See 65 S.Ct. 587.
The appellant was convicted, with three codefendants who have not appealed, of conspiracy to operate unregistered stills. It is conceded that the codefendants owned and operated illicit stills and purchased therefor large quantities of sugar from the appellant, who conducted a grocery store at 106th Street and First Avenue in New York City; but it is urged that the proof is insufficient to establish that the appellant was a party to the conspiracy. In reliance upon United States v. Falcone, 311 U.S. 205, 61 S.Ct. 204, 85 L.Ed. 128, and Direct Sales Co. v. United States, 319 U.S. 703, 63 S.Ct. 1265, 87 L.Ed. 1674, the appellant contends that selling sugar to illicit distillers with knowledge that they would use it in violation of the law does not prove him to have been a participant in their conspiracy, even though his sales may have furthered the object of the conspiracy. But the proof in the case at bar shows a much more direct participation in the conspiracy than appeared in the cases above cited. Here the sales were not made openly at the appellant's place of business; he arranged to take orders by telephone under code words, and he delivered the sugar furtively at night, once at one of the illicit stills and generally at a coal yard where the sugar was transferred from the appellant's truck to the bootleggers' automobiles. He knew of the conspiracy, for Thomas Sharp was introduced to him by Blenhyme with the remark: He also aided the conspirators to conceal their purchases by failing to make the record of sugar sales required by governmental regulations. The assistance so given the illicit distillers was sufficient to support a finding that the appellant had made himself a party to the illegal conspiracy. United States v. Pandolfi, 2 Cir., 110 F.2d 736 certiorari denied 310 U.S. 651, 60 S.Ct. 1103, 84 L.Ed. 1416; United States v. Pecoraro, 2 Cir., 115 F.2d 245, 246 certiorari denied 312 U.S. 685, 61 S.Ct. 611, 85 L.Ed. 1123.
It is urged that error was committed in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Cogan
...(1949); United States v. Winters, 158 F.2d 674 (2d Cir. 1946); United States v. Simonds, 148 F.2d 177 (2d Cir. 1945); United States v. Loew, 145 F.2d 332 (2d Cir. 1944), cert. denied, 324 U.S. 840, 65 S.Ct. 587, 89 L.Ed. 1403 (1945); Freeman v. United States, 146 F.2d 978 (6th Cir. 1945); L......
-
U.S. v. Notarantonio, s. 84-1496
...reasonably infer indicated efforts to conceal the conspiracy or to disguise the acts that furthered its objective. Cf. United States v. Loew, 145 F.2d 332 (2d Cir.1944) (upholding conviction of conspirators who made no record of sales of sugar despite federal government's requiring them to ......
-
United States v. Boisvert
...to commit it, this rule does not apply where the substantive offense can be committed by a single individual. United States v. Loew, 2 Cir., 1944, 145 F.2d 332; Lisansky v. United States, 1929, 4 Cir., 31 F.2d 846, 67 A.L.R. 67; Laughter v. United States, 6 Cir., 1919, 259 F. 94; Chadwick v......
-
United States v. Albanese
...L.Ed. 919. Although the defendants rely on United States v. Zeuli, 2 Cir., 1943, 137 F.2d 845, as the court stated in United States v. Loew, 2 Cir., 1944, 145 F.2d 332, 333: "The appellant misunderstands the doctrine to which we referred in United States v. Zeuli 2 Cir., 137 F.2d 845. It is......