United States v. Windle, No. 13388.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | GARDNER, SANBORN, and WOODROUGH, Circuit |
| Citation | 158 F.2d 196 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. WINDLE. |
| Docket Number | No. 13388. |
| Decision Date | 04 December 1946 |
158 F.2d 196 (1946)
UNITED STATES
v.
WINDLE.
No. 13388.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
December 4, 1946.
William R. Sheridan, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Keokuk, Iowa (Maurice F. Donegan, U. S. Atty., of Davenport, Iowa, on the brief), for appellant.
Carl H. Lambach, of Davenport, Iowa, for appellee.
Before GARDNER, SANBORN, and WOODROUGH, Circuit Judges.
WOODROUGH, Circuit Judge.
The United States filed libel for forfeiture of a 1940 Dodge coupe automobile and its contents, consisting of approximately 48 gallons of whiskey, because of the intended use of the automobile and its contents in violation of internal revenue laws relating to selling distilled spirits at wholesale without paying the special tax applicable to a wholesale liquor dealer and without keeping required records. James C. Windle intervened and filed an answer claiming ownership of the seized property. The answer was treated as a motion to dismiss or a demurrer and the case was submitted on the pleadings. The District Court entered an order dismissing the automobile from the libel and ordering its return to intervener, and the United States has appealed.
The libel presents that at the time the automobile and liquor were seized by an agent of the Alcohol Tax Unit they were owned and possessed by Windle, and that he held the liquor in the car with intention to use it in violation of internal revenue laws, contrary to 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, § 3116, and further states that for a long period of time prior to the seizure Windle had been unlawfully carrying on the business of a wholesale liquor dealer and had sold and offered for sale distilled spirits in quantities of five wine gallons or more to the same person at the same time, without paying the special wholesale liquor dealer's tax required by law, and without rendering under oath to the District Supervisor of the Alcohol Tax Unit, correct transcripts and summaries of records required under internal revenue laws and regulations promulgated thereunder.
While the libel states that the distilled spirits were at the time of seizure
"Penalities and forfeitures for nonpayment of special tax.
"Any person who shall carry on the business of a brewer, rectifier, wholesale liquor dealer, retail liquor dealer, wholesale dealer in malt liquors, retail dealer in malt liquors, or manufacturer of stills, and willfully fails to pay the special tax as required by law, shall, for every such offense, be fined not less than $100 nor more than $5,000 and be imprisoned for not less than thirty days nor more than two years. And all distilled spirits or wines, and all stills or other apparatus, fit or intended to be used for the distillation or rectification of spirits, or for the compounding of liquors, owned by such person, wherever found, and all distilled spirits or wines and personal property found in the distillery or rectifying establishment, or in any building, room, yard, or enclosure connected therewith and used with or constituting a part of the premises, shall be forfeited to the United States. 53 Stat. 391."
26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, § 3116 provides:
"Forfeitures and seizures.
"It shall be unlawful to have or possess any liquor or property intended for use in violating the provisions of this part, or the internal-revenue laws, or regulations prescribed under such part or laws, or which has been so used, and no property rights shall exist in any such liquor or property. A seach warrant may issue as provided in title XI...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
ASSOCIATED GEN. CONTR., CAL. v. SECRETARY OF COM., US, Civ. No. 77-3738-AAH.
...1194, 1196 (5th Cir. 1976). 26 Shelton v. United States, 83 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 35, 165 F.2d 241, 244 (1947). 27 United States v. Windle, 158 F.2d 196, 199 (8th Cir. 28 Full text at footnote 20, supra. 29 Full text at footnote 21, supra. 30 1964 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News, pp. 2391-2394, at 2......
-
U.S. v. One 1975 Pontiac Lemans, Vehicle I.D. No. 2F37M56101227, No. 79-1275
...involving forfeitures." United States v. Ryan, 284 U.S. 167, 172, 52 S.Ct. 65, 67, 76 L.Ed. 224 (1931); see United States v. Windle, 158 F.2d 196, 199 (8th Cir. 1946). Literally, the statute merely permits Page 449 the use of a search warrant to effectuate a seizure, and we find nothing in ......
-
Green v. City of Mt. Pleasant, No. 51515
...statute. This is especially true in this case because chapter 247 was enacted after the adoption of section 76.6. United States v. Windle, 158 F.2d 196 (C.C.A. 8th Cir., 1946); State v. County of Lancaster, 113 N.W.2d 63 (Neb.) at page 69. 'Ruling on ground 26 of plaintiff's petition will b......
-
United States v. 673 Cases of Distilled Spirits and Wines, Civ. A. No. 677.
...It might be well to first note the recent decision of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of United States v. Windle, 8 Cir., 158 F.2d 196, wherein a 74 F. Supp. 626 libel was filed by the United States of America for forfeiture of a 1940 Dodge coupe and its contents consisting ......
-
ASSOCIATED GEN. CONTR., CAL. v. SECRETARY OF COM., US, Civ. No. 77-3738-AAH.
...1194, 1196 (5th Cir. 1976). 26 Shelton v. United States, 83 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 35, 165 F.2d 241, 244 (1947). 27 United States v. Windle, 158 F.2d 196, 199 (8th Cir. 28 Full text at footnote 20, supra. 29 Full text at footnote 21, supra. 30 1964 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News, pp. 2391-2394, at 2......
-
U.S. v. One 1975 Pontiac Lemans, Vehicle I.D. No. 2F37M56101227, No. 79-1275
...involving forfeitures." United States v. Ryan, 284 U.S. 167, 172, 52 S.Ct. 65, 67, 76 L.Ed. 224 (1931); see United States v. Windle, 158 F.2d 196, 199 (8th Cir. 1946). Literally, the statute merely permits Page 449 the use of a search warrant to effectuate a seizure, and we find nothing in ......
-
Green v. City of Mt. Pleasant, No. 51515
...statute. This is especially true in this case because chapter 247 was enacted after the adoption of section 76.6. United States v. Windle, 158 F.2d 196 (C.C.A. 8th Cir., 1946); State v. County of Lancaster, 113 N.W.2d 63 (Neb.) at page 69. 'Ruling on ground 26 of plaintiff's petition will b......
-
United States v. 673 Cases of Distilled Spirits and Wines, Civ. A. No. 677.
...It might be well to first note the recent decision of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of United States v. Windle, 8 Cir., 158 F.2d 196, wherein a 74 F. Supp. 626 libel was filed by the United States of America for forfeiture of a 1940 Dodge coupe and its contents consisting ......