Wheeler v. United States
| Decision Date | 25 October 1923 |
| Docket Number | 4213. |
| Citation | 293 F. 588 |
| Parties | WHEELER v. UNITED STATES. [1] |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Neil Sterne, of Anniston, Ala., and Tyler Goodwyn, of Montgomery Ala., for plaintiff in error.
C. B Kennamer, U.S. Atty., of Guntersville, Ala., and Jim C Smith, Asst. U.S. atty., of Birmingham, Ala.
Before WALKER and BRYAN, Circuit Judges, and CALL, District Judge.
The defendant, Thomas R. Wheeler, was convicted on an indictment under section 65 of the Penal Code (Comp. St. Sec. 10233) charging him with an assault upon one Ferguson, an officer of the internal revenue, while that officer, in the execution of his duty, was engaged 'in making search for persons having in their possession and transporting and conveying illicit spirits, to wit, whisky.'
A demurrer was interposed to the indictment, and objection was made to any evidence in support thereof, upon the ground that the indictment fails to allege that the revenue officer had a search warrant. The evidence for the government discloses that Ferguson and Allison, two prohibition agents and deputy collectors of internal revenue, and several others, were in search of persons who might be transporting intoxicating liquor in automobiles. Ferguson and some of the officers were on one road, and Allison and other officers on another. About dark Allison's party was fired upon from ambush. Ferguson came to their assistance.
A bloodhound was secured, and tracks were discovered leading to defendant's house. The defendant was taken into custody, and assaulted Ferguson with a knife while the latter was experimenting to ascertain whether defendant's shoes fitted into the tracks leading away from the scene of the shooting.
The defendant became a witness in his own behalf, and on cross-examination was compelled to answer over his objection whether he had been previously convicted of a felony by violating the internal revenue laws. The answer was in the affirmative. It was not necessary either to allege or to prove that the revenue officer was armed with search warrants while he was on the public highway in an effort to ascertain whether the law was being violated by persons having in their possession or transporting intoxicating liquors. The question of the right to search automobiles for the purpose of arresting persons violating the prohibition law is not involved. That question could be raised only by persons...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. United States
...C. C. A. 126; MacKnight v. United States (C. C. A.) 263 F. 832; Murray v. United States, 53 App. D. C. 119, 288 F. 1008; Wheeler v. United States (C. C. A.) 293 F. 588; Fields et al. v. United States, 221 F. 242, 137 C. C. A. 98; Christopoulo v. United States, 230 F. 788, 145 C. C. A. 98; T......
-
Scaffidi v. United States, 2336.
...unlawfully sold intoxicating liquor, he thereby opened the door for cross-examination as to previous violations. In Wheeler v. United States, 293 F. 588 (C. C. A. 5th, 1923), it is held that, where a defendant takes the stand in his own behalf, he may be asked on cross-examination for the p......
-
Whitfield v. United States, 18517.
...Scaffidi v. United States, 37 F.2d 203, 211 (1st Cir. 1930); Williams v. United States, 3 F.2d 129 (8th Cir. 1924); Wheeler v. United States, 293 F. 588 (5th Cir. 1923); see Rizzo v. United States, 304 F.2d 810 (8th Cir. 1962); 1 WIGMORE, EVIDENCE § 196 (3d ed. 1940); 3 WIGMORE, EVIDENCE § ......
-
Stinnett v. Commonwealth of Virginia
...at the time engaged in a search or seizure, but merely that he be engaged in the performance of his duties under the law. Wheeler v. U. S. (C. C. A. 5th) 293 F. 588. But, of course, the officers here were as a matter of fact engaged in the seizure of the beer and the paraphernalia used in t......