United States v. Schouweiler
| Decision Date | 10 May 1927 |
| Docket Number | No. 8482-J.,8482-J. |
| Citation | 19 F.2d 387 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of California |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. SCHOUWEILER et al. |
Samuel W. McNabb, U. S. Atty., and J. Geo. Ohannesian, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Los Angeles, Cal.
MacDonald & Thompson, of Los Angeles, Cal., for moving defendants.
Thirteen persons are charged in the indictment of the grand jury with having, during a period extending from August 1, 1926, to and including October 26, 1926, conspired among themselves, and with other persons unnamed, to smuggle and clandestinely bring into the United States, in violation of the Tariff Act, intoxicating liquors. Six of the defendants, to wit, Ernest August Kollberg, Axel Tinberg, Mathew Johnson, Otto Ebenhoch, and Salvador Leon, have appeared specially and questioned the jurisdiction of the court over their persons, asserting that they were arrested at sea, where the United States could not legally take them into custody. The motion is supported by the affidavits of said defendants.
The answering affidavit for the government presents no material difference as to the main facts. It is made to appear that the arrest of the defendants was incidental to the seizure of a vessel named the Hakadate, which had aboard a cargo of alcohol. The vessel was regularly registered under the laws of the republic of Panama. Prior to being seized, the vessel last cleared from the port of Mazatlan, Mexico. The alcohol cargo was consigned to the port of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. United States Coast Guard cutter Vaughn, engaged in patrol work and on the lookout for liquor smugglers, intercepted the Hakadate at a distance of about 4½ miles from the Mexican shore, and at a distance of approximately 66 nautical miles from the nearest point of the United States coast line, and the same distance from the projection on the Pacific Ocean of the international boundary line between the United States and Mexico. Upon the vessel being boarded by the United States revenue officers and being found to carry a liquor cargo, the master and crew were placed under arrest and the vessel towed into the United States port of San Pedro. The moving defendants herein were members of the crew of the Hakadate.
It is admitted by the government that the United States was without power or right to search or seize the Hakadate or its crew, unless such action was authorized by the special treaty made with Panama under date of January 19, 1925. During the year of 1924 and the early part of 1925 the United States concluded with Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Norway, Panama, and Sweden special...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v Toscanino
...U.S. at 121–122 (emphasis supplied). See also United States v. Ferris,[5] 19 F.2d [51 925 (N.D.Cal.1927); United States v. Schouweiler, 19 F.2d 387 (S.D.Cal.1927). Thus Ker does not apply where a defendant has been brought into the district court's jurisdiction by forcible abduction in viol......
-
U.S. v. Cadena
...Ford v. United States,supra (no timely objection); United States v. Winters, supra, 509 F.2d at 988-989 (dictum); United States v. Schouweiler, S.D.Cal.1927, 19 F.2d 387; United States v. Ferris, N.D.Cal.1927, 19 F.2d 925; See also Cook v. United States, 1933, 288 U.S. 102, 121-122, 53 S.Ct......
-
U.S. v. Winter, 73--2236
...prohibition-era cases to distinguish Ker. Ford v. United States, 1927, 273 U.S. 593, 47 S.Ct. 531, 71 L.Ed. 793; United States v. Schouweiler, S.D.Cal., 1927, 19 F.2d 387; United States v. Ferris, N.D.Cal., 1927, 19 F.2d 925.43 The Court stated:The Solicitor General answers, on the authorit......
-
United States v. Chaplin
...in bar, indictment was to be considered part of the record. United States v. Noble, D.C., 19 F.Supp. 527. Judge James, in United States v. Schouwiler, D.C., 19 F.2d 387, held plea in bar following Ford v. United States, 273 U.S. 593, 47 S.Ct. 531, 535, 71 L.Ed. 793. In that case the court s......