Hayden v. United States

284 F. 852, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2482
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedNovember 24, 1922
DocketNo. 3948
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 284 F. 852 (Hayden 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
Hayden v. United States, 284 F. 852, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2482 (5th Cir. 1922).

Opinion

KING, Circuit Judge.

The plaintiff in error was indicted under the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act and amendments (Comp. St. 1918, Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1919, § 6287g); the indictment containing four counts. She was convicted under the first count, charging that she had not registered as required by said act, and was in unlawful possession of 12 grains of morphine, and also under the fourth count, charging her [853]*853with having purchased 12 grains of morphine, the same not being purchased in or from the original stamped package.

The error assigned is the overruling of a demurrer to each of said counts, on the ground that each count of said indictment was fatally defective, and did not allege facts sufficient to show that defendant had been guilty of an offense. The brief in said case presents the sole question that the indictment is fatally defective, in that it does not aver that the said defendant was a person who was required under said act of Congress and its amendments to register.

The second count, under which said defendant 'ivas convicted, charges that the defendant unlawfully purchased said morphine, not in or from the original stamped package, in violation of the amendment to said act making such purchase unlawful. This provision makes such purchase by any person, whether registered or not, unlawful, and this count of the indictment is, in our opinion, not obnoxious to the demurrer interposed.

The defendant was sentenced to 18 months’ confinement in the Colorado State Prison for Women. As either count of the indictment is sufficient to support this sentence, and as the fourth count upon which she was convicted is good, it is unnecessary to consider whether the' first, count was subject to demurrer.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

Related

Taylor v. United States
19 F.2d 813 (Eighth Circuit, 1927)
O'Neill v. United States
19 F.2d 322 (Eighth Circuit, 1927)
Rossi v. United States
9 F.2d 362 (Eighth Circuit, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
284 F. 852, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hayden-v-united-states-ca5-1922.