Clement v. United States

D.C. Circuit

Clement v. United States

208 F.2d 46, 93 U.S. App. D.C. 154, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3019

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedNovember 20, 1953

Docket11673

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 208 F.2d 46 (Clement v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clement v. United States, 208 F.2d 46, 93 U.S. App. D.C. 154, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3019 (D.C. Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

D.C.Code (1951) § 22-1502, 52 Stat. 198 (1938), penalized possession of slips “used, or to be used” for carrying on a lottery. Appellant’s possession of used numbers slips, known in the game as “dead” slips, was therefore an offense, although it occurred before Public Law 85, § 206, 83d Cong., 1st Sess., June 29, 1953, which adds the words “current or not current,” was enacted. France v. United States, 164 U.S. 676, 17 S.Ct. 219, 41 L.Ed. 595, and United States v. Halseth, 342 U.S. 277, 72 S.Ct. 275, 96 L.Ed. 308, on which appellant relies, dealt with statutes that did not contain the word “used” or any equivalent word.

Appellant’s possession of used slips was also “prima-facie evidence” of carrying on a lottery. D.C.Code (1951) § 22-1501, 31 Stat. 1330 (1901) as amended. Harvey v. United States, 91 U.S.App.D.C. 36, 197 F.2d 594; Shaw v. United States, 93 U.S.App.D.C. -, 209 F.2d 298.

We have considered appellant’s other contentions and find no error.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

D.C.Code (1951) § 22-1502, 52 Stat. 198 (1938), penalized possession of slips “used, or to be used” for carrying on a lottery. Appellant’s possession of used numbers slips, known in the game as “dead” slips, was therefore an offense, although it occurred before Public Law 85, § 206, 83d Cong., 1st Sess., June 29, 1953, which adds the words “current or not current,” was enacted. France v. United States, 164 U.S. 676, 17 S.Ct. 219, 41 L.Ed. 595, and United States v. Halseth, 342 U.S. 277, 72 S.Ct. 275, 96 L.Ed. 308, on which appellant relies, dealt with statutes that did not contain the word “used” or any equivalent word.

Appellant’s possession of used slips was also “prima-facie evidence” of carrying on a lottery. D.C.Code (1951) § 22-1501, 31 Stat. 1330 (1901) as amended. Harvey v. United States, 91 U.S.App.D.C. 36, 197 F.2d 594; Shaw v. United States, 93 U.S.App.D.C. -, 209 F.2d 298.

We have considered appellant’s other contentions and find no error.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 F.2d 46, 93 U.S. App. D.C. 154, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clement-v-united-states-cadc-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack