United States v. Williams, 73-1471.

Decision Date08 October 1973
Docket NumberNo. 73-1471.,73-1471.
Citation485 F.2d 1383
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Herman Louis WILLIAMS, Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Richard J. Stahl, Court-appointed counsel, Richmond, Va. (Horwitz, Baer & Neblett, Inc., Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellant.

Raymond A. Carpenter, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Brian P. Gettings, U. S. Atty., on brief), for appellee.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, and FIELD and WIDENER, Circuit Judges.

FIELD, Circuit Judge:

This case involves the construction of 18 U.S.C. § 922(e), a section of the Gun Control Act of 1968, regulating the shipment in interstate or foreign commerce of firearms and ammunition by common or contract carrier. Section 922(e) makes it unlawful "for any person knowingly to deliver or cause to be delivered to any common or contract carrier for transportation or shipment in interstate or foreign commerce, to persons other than licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors, any package or other container in which there is any firearm or ammunition without written notice to the carrier that such firearm or ammunition is being transported or shipped; except that any passenger who owns or legally possesses a firearm or ammunition being transported aboard any common or contract carrier for movement with the passenger in interstate or foreign commerce may deliver said firearm or ammunition into the custody of the pilot, captain, conductor or operator of such common or contract carrier for the duration of the trip without violating any of the provisions of this chapter." (Emphasis added).

In November, 1971, Herman Louis Williams boarded an Altair Air Lines flight from Baltimore, Maryland, to Richmond, Virginia. Before boarding the plane, Williams handed his luggage to the pilot who placed it in the nose cone of the plane where it remained throughout the flight. Williams did not inform the pilot orally or in writing that a firearm was in the luggage. Williams was indicted for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(e) and was found guilty by the district judge sitting without a jury.

Before the district court and this court Williams has maintained that he qualifies under the exception clause of Section 922(e) which we have emphasized above. It is undisputed that Williams was a passenger who legally owned or possessed the firearm in question which was transported in interstate commerce aboard a common carrier. At issue is whether Williams' transfer of the luggage to the plane's pilot without informing him of its contents satisfied the requirement that the passenger "deliver said firearm * * * into the custody of the pilot." Williams argues that a relinquishment of control is all that the statute requires of a passenger and in support of his argument notes the absence in the exception clause of an express notice requirement such as that imposed on certain shippers.

While it is true that criminal statutes are to be strictly construed and that ambiguities are to be resolved in favor of the defendant, statutes are not to be construed in a manner which would defeat their clear purpose. United States v. Cook, 384 U.S. 257, 262, 86 S.Ct. 1412, 16...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • United States v. Handler, Crim. No. K-74-0283.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • October 24, 1974
    ...with the evident intent of Congress." * * * Citations omitted. Citing and relying upon Cook, Judge Field, in United States v. Williams, 485 F.2d 1383, 1384 (4th Cir. 1973), While it is true that criminal statutes are to be strictly construed and that ambiguities are to be resolved in favor ......
  • U.S. v. Udofot
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • August 11, 1983
    ...of the common carrier without giving oral or written notice does not qualify for this particular exception. In United States v. Williams, 485 F.2d 1383, 1384-85 (4th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 941, 94 S.Ct. 1947, 40 L.Ed.2d 293 (1974), the Fourth Circuit rejected an argument identica......
  • U.S. v. Henry
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • February 22, 1980
    ...even if Henry did own or legally possess the gun, some kind of notice to the common carrier is required. See United States v. Williams, 485 F.2d 1383 (4th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 941, 94 S.Ct. 1947, 40 L.Ed.2d 293 (1974) and United States v. Burton, 351 F.Supp. 1372 (W.D.Mo.1972)......
  • United States v. Channel
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • September 30, 1976
    ...accord with the evident intent of Congress." * * * Citations omitted. Judge Field, relying upon Cook, observed in United States v. Williams, 485 F.2d 1383, 1384 (4th Cir. 1973): While it is true that criminal statutes are to be strictly construed and that ambiguities are to be resolved in f......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT