O. C. Brown and Lewis Brown v. United States

401 F.2d 769
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedNovember 8, 1968
Docket25008
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 401 F.2d 769 (O. C. Brown and Lewis Brown 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
O. C. Brown and Lewis Brown v. United States, 401 F.2d 769 (5th Cir. 1968).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

On this appeal, the appellants seek to bring themselves within the rule of Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39, 88 S.Ct. 697, 19 L.Ed.2d 889, and Grosso v. United States, 390 U.S. 62, 88 S.Ct. 709, 19 L.Ed.2d 906, in which the Supreme Court held that the accused persons could not be convicted criminally for failure to comply with the statutory requirements requiring them to register and buy a stamp to permit them to engage in the wagering business. These appellants were convicted of having in their possession distilled spirits in containers which did not bear the proper Internal Revenue stamps.

Perhaps if this prosecution had occurred under an appropriate statute that existed during the short life of the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, appellants could properly equate their situation to the appellants in Marchetti. As it is, however, we are informed by the government’s brief, and it is not disputed, (a matter of which we can take judicial notice) that possession of distilled spirits is legal to some extent in every one of the fifty states of the union. Therefore, we find ourselves in agreement with those district courts in addition to the trial court here, which have held that there is no danger of self incrimination resulting from the requirement of Sections 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a) (1) relating to the placing of stamps and taxing of distilled spirits.

We have also considered the supplementary brief filed pro se by the appellant O. C. Brown and find no merit in it.

The judgment was affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Zhong H. Chen
815 F.3d 72 (First Circuit, 2016)
United States v. Worthy Curt Pogue
433 F.2d 363 (Fifth Circuit, 1970)
United States v. Pogue
433 F.2d 363 (Fifth Circuit, 1970)
United States v. Augustus Hunt
419 F.2d 1 (Third Circuit, 1970)
United States v. Roy Whitehead
424 F.2d 446 (Sixth Circuit, 1970)
Bernard Wilson v. United States
409 F.2d 604 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
Cecil J. Thornburg v. United States
406 F.2d 1060 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
Ford Grant v. United States
407 F.2d 56 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
Loy Buford Hall v. United States
407 F.2d 1320 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
United States v. G. Troy Ellington
406 F.2d 348 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
William Fred Dryden v. United States
403 F.2d 1008 (Fifth Circuit, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
401 F.2d 769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/o-c-brown-and-lewis-brown-v-united-states-ca5-1968.