United States v. Watson, Cr. No. 2573.
| Court | United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia) |
| Writing for the Court | Andrew W. Clarke, of Alexandria, Va., for defendant |
| Citation | 80 F. Supp. 649 |
| Docket Number | Cr. No. 2573. |
| Decision Date | 10 September 1948 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. WATSON. |
80 F. Supp. 649
UNITED STATES
v.
WATSON.
Cr. No. 2573.
United States District Court E. D. Virginia, Alexandria Division.
September 10, 1948.
George R. Humrickhouse, U.S.Atty., of Richmond, Va., for plaintiff.
Andrew W. Clarke, of Alexandria, Va., for defendant.
BRYAN, District Judge.
The United States informs against the accused in four counts. The first specifies the reckless driving of an automobile on Fuller Road, as prohibited by the statutes of Virginia and made a federal offense by the Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 13. Each of the other counts alleges a violation of section 1382, title 18 U.S.C.A., in that the defendant reentered the United States Marine Corps Reservation at Quantico, Virginia, that is, went upon Fuller Road, after having been ordered not to do so by the general in command.
The first count tenders the question of whether the road was within the criminal jurisdiction of the United States, and the other counts depend for decision on whether the road is a reservation in the requisite ownership or possession of the United States.
The practical importance of the jurisdictional question here involved justifies the time that has been allowed for research by the United States and the defendant.
On proper waiver the case was tried to the court without a jury. At the conclusion of the testimony it was agreed that the parties would brief the jurisdictional point, and also submit to the court any title documents pertaining to the road and deemed relevant by the prosecution or the defense.
The Government has proved beyond a reasonable doubt the commission by the defendant of the acts charged to him in the information, and the Court should find him guilty on each count if the United States has the requisite jurisdiction and ownership or possession of the highway, all of such acts having been committed on it.
Fuller Road extends from the Richmond-Washington Highway, a public highway of the State of Virginia and designated as U.S. No. 1, eastwardly for a distance of several miles to the town or village of Quantico, Virginia, located on the west bank of the Potomac River. Originally Fuller Road was a public or county road for access to Quantico and the adjacent territory. The United States established the Marine Corps Barracks at Quantico in June 1917, holding the site under a lease describing a tract of land that embraced the road and the land on each side of it. After the Government occupied the leased area, the road was used by the Marine Corps for vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the Reservation and between No. 1 Highway and the Reservation's main gate, which was located near the eastern terminus of the road and almost abutting Quantico, and the public continued to use it in going to and from Quantico.
In 1918 through appropriate steps, including a proclamation by the President, No. 1493, Nov. 4, 1918, 40 Stat. part 2, 1874, 1880-1884, and supplementary hearings as authorized by an enabling Act of Congress, July 1, 1918, 40 Stat. 724, 738, the United States acquired the fee simple title to the Reservation. The perimeter description of the land so acquired coincided with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Holdridge v. United States, No. 16380.
...language in both the petition for condemnation and in the declaration of taking. The defense cites United States v. Watson, D.C.E.D.Va., 80 F.Supp. 649, as authority for the proposition that the government's taking does not support a conclusion that the public's right of user in the roads i......
-
U.S. v. McCoy, No. 86-1902
...have been convicted under Sec. 1382 for simply driving past the base in the southbound lane of Highway F-41. See United States v. Watson, 80 F.Supp. 649 (E.D.Va.1948). See also United States v. Albertini, 472 U.S. 675, 698-99, 105 S.Ct. 2897, 2911-12, 86 L.Ed.2d 536 (1985), where Justice St......
-
United States v. Flower, No. 31143.
...regulation. Appellant's reliance on this case is therefore of no help to his contentions. Appellant also cites United States v. Watson, 80 F.Supp. 649 (E.D., Va., 1948), as support for his contention that although Fort Sam Houston had been conveyed to the United States government for milita......
-
United States v. Holmes, Crim. No. M-75-0715.
...of the law of trespass, have a right of sole ownership or possession in those areas as against the defendant. United States v. Watson, 80 F.Supp. 649 (E.D.Va. In Watson, the court held that the Federal Government had acquired title to the lands constituting the Marine Corps Reservation at Q......
-
Holdridge v. United States, No. 16380.
...language in both the petition for condemnation and in the declaration of taking. The defense cites United States v. Watson, D.C.E.D.Va., 80 F.Supp. 649, as authority for the proposition that the government's taking does not support a conclusion that the public's right of user in the roads i......
-
U.S. v. McCoy, No. 86-1902
...have been convicted under Sec. 1382 for simply driving past the base in the southbound lane of Highway F-41. See United States v. Watson, 80 F.Supp. 649 (E.D.Va.1948). See also United States v. Albertini, 472 U.S. 675, 698-99, 105 S.Ct. 2897, 2911-12, 86 L.Ed.2d 536 (1985), where Justice St......
-
United States v. Flower, No. 31143.
...regulation. Appellant's reliance on this case is therefore of no help to his contentions. Appellant also cites United States v. Watson, 80 F.Supp. 649 (E.D., Va., 1948), as support for his contention that although Fort Sam Houston had been conveyed to the United States government for milita......
-
United States v. Holmes, Crim. No. M-75-0715.
...of the law of trespass, have a right of sole ownership or possession in those areas as against the defendant. United States v. Watson, 80 F.Supp. 649 (E.D.Va. In Watson, the court held that the Federal Government had acquired title to the lands constituting the Marine Corps Reservation at Q......