Claude Cornelius Hooper v. United States

388 F.2d 392, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 8380
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 17, 1968
Docket24429_1
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 388 F.2d 392 (Claude Cornelius Hooper v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Claude Cornelius Hooper v. United States, 388 F.2d 392, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 8380 (5th Cir. 1968).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A jury found Claude Cornelius Hooper guilty of possession of an unregistered distillery, 26 U.S.C. § 5179, possession of non-tax-paid whiskey, 26 U.S.C. § 5205, and of working in an unregistered distillery, 26 U.S.C. § 5681. Hooper seeks reversal, relying primarily on Vick v. United States, 5 Cir. 1954, 216 F.2d 228, which held that mere presence at a still and attempted flight from a raid is insufficient evidence to sustain a conviction for these crimes. See also United States v. Romano, 1965, 382 U.S. 136, 86 S.Ct. 279, 15 L.Ed.2d 210. However, where there is additional proof, the jury’s conclusions of guilt may be warranted. McFarland v. United States, 5 Cir. 1960, 273 F.2d 417. We find from the following facts sufficient evidence “from which the jury may infer guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 419:

(1) Before his attempted flight Hooper was surrounded by 90 one-gallon glass jugs containing whiskey, a tub containing approximately five gal- *393 Ions of whiskey, and a truck containing fifteen gallons of whiskey;
(2) All of the whiskey in the glass jugs and the tub was hot; expert testimony advises that immediately after the distilling process whiskey is hot;
(3) Hooper wore boots with a distinctive thread design identical to that imprinted in the ground in and around the still yard;
(4) Hooper was not wearing a jacket, and a jacket of his size, which was large, was discovered in the still yard;
(5) The distillery was complete in every detail, and contained three 846 gallon stills, of which two were filled with “live” mash and a third was boiling fermented mash.

Our examination of the record convinces us that the other errors alleged are without merit.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
388 F.2d 392, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 8380, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claude-cornelius-hooper-v-united-states-ca5-1968.