Thomas Moreaux Griffith. v. United States

230 F.2d 607, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3294
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 7, 1956
Docket12614
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 230 F.2d 607 (Thomas Moreaux Griffith. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thomas Moreaux Griffith. v. United States, 230 F.2d 607, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3294 (6th Cir. 1956).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from judgment and sentence of three years’ imprisonment entered by the United States District Judge upon the verdict of a jury, finding defendant guilty on the first count of an indictment for violation of the Mann Act, Section 2421, Title 18, U.S.C.A., has been heard and considered upon the briefs and oral arguments of the opposing attorneys and upon the record in the case;

And it appearing that the omission of the word “knowingly” in the indictment is insignificant, where the indictment charged that appellant had transported in interstate commerce a female from Birmingham, Alabama, to Nashville, Tennessee, via Corsicana, Texas, “for immoral purposes and commercialized prostitution”, inasmuch as the words used in the indictment plainly and definitely indicate that the essential ingredient of scienter existed in the mind of appellant; that the indictment *608 is a sufficiently plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged, in compliance with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 7, section (c), 18 U.S.C.A.; and that it meets the standard required by law[, Gariepy v. United States, 6 Cir., 189 F.2d 459; Gariepy v. United States, 6 Cir., 220 F.2d 252; Ross v. United States, 6 Cir., 180 F.2d 160, and United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280, 42 S.Ct. 303, 66 L.Ed. 619.];

And it appearing that there is substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury and that there is no error of law in the rulings or the charge of United States District Judge Davies.

The judgment of conviction and sentence is affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. De Castro-Font
587 F. Supp. 2d 372 (D. Puerto Rico, 2008)
United States v. Earl McLennan
672 F.2d 239 (First Circuit, 1982)
United States v. Ann Marie Maselli
534 F.2d 1197 (Sixth Circuit, 1976)
United States v. Robert A. Barbato
471 F.2d 918 (First Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Thompson-Powell Drilling Company
196 F. Supp. 571 (N.D. Texas, 1961)
George C. Finn v. United States
256 F.2d 304 (Fourth Circuit, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
230 F.2d 607, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-moreaux-griffith-v-united-states-ca6-1956.