United States v. Daniel Wesley Harris

331 F.2d 600, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5397
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedMay 13, 1964
Docket15564_1
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 331 F.2d 600 (United States v. Daniel Wesley Harris) 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
United States v. Daniel Wesley Harris, 331 F.2d 600, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5397 (6th Cir. 1964).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant, Daniel Wesley Harris, was convicted on June 13, 1963, under a one-count indictment charging him with the illegal possession of nontaxpaid whis *601 key in Lincoln Heights, Ohio, in the Southern District of Ohio, in violation of Sections 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a) (1), Title 26, United States Code. The District Judge overruled defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal under Rule 29, Rules of Criminal Procedure.

On this appeal defendant concedes that there was undisputed evidence that the alleged offense took place in Hamilton County, Ohio. However, the record also shows that no evidence was introduced showing that Hamilton County, Ohio, was in the Southern District of Ohio. The defendant contends that the Government failed to prove venue in the Southern District of Ohio, as charged in the indictment.

The District Judge instructed the jury that “Hamilton County, Ohio is located in .said Southern District of Ohio.” The defendant contends that the District Judge was not authorized to so charge the jury.

We think the instruction was a proper one. The District Court may take judicial notice of established geographical facts. Krench v. United States, 42 F.2d 354, 355, C.A. 6th; Weaver v. United States, 298 F.2d 496, 499, C.A. 5th; Rutherford v. United States, 264 F.2d 180, 186, C.A. 9th; United States v. Echeles, 222 F.2d 144, 158, C.A. 7th, cert. denied, 350 U.S. 828, 76 S.Ct. 58, 100 L.Ed. 739, rehearing denied, 350 U.S. 905, 76 S.Ct. 176, 100 L.Ed. 795.

The District Court will also take judicial notice of the statutes of the United States. United States v. Fullard-Leo, 331 U.S. 256, 269, 67 S.Ct. 1287, 91 L.Ed. 1474; Louisville Gas & Electric Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 129 F.2d 126, 134, C.A. 6th, cert. denied, 318 U.S. 761, 63 S.Ct. 559, 87 L.Ed. 1133, rehearing denied, 318 U.S. 800, 63 S.Ct. 768, 87 L.Ed. 1164; Cohen v. United States, 129 F.2d 733, 736, C.A. 8th. Section 115(b) (1), Title 28, United States Code, provides that Hamilton ■County is in the Southern District of Ohio.

Nor is it necessary that the Court he requested to take judicial notice of a fact before it is authorized to do so. The Court may take judicial notice sua sponte. Weaver v. United States, supra, 298 F.2d 496, 498, C.A. 5th; Mills v. Denver Tramway Corp., 155 F.2d 808, 812, C.A. 10th.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Victor Everette Silvers
129 F.4th 332 (Sixth Circuit, 2025)
Matthew Eric Baham & Jennifer Michelle Baham v. Commissioner
2017 T.C. Summary Opinion 85 (U.S. Tax Court, 2017)
Smiling v. Comm'r
2017 T.C. Memo. 196 (U.S. Tax Court, 2017)
Martinez v. Comm'r
2017 T.C. Summary Opinion 42 (U.S. Tax Court, 2017)
Navelski v. International Paper Co.
244 F. Supp. 3d 1275 (N.D. Florida, 2017)
Patricia Arroyo DDS, Corp. v. Comm'r
2017 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 21 (U.S. Tax Court, 2017)
Binns v. Comm'r
2016 T.C. Summary Opinion 90 (U.S. Tax Court, 2016)
Garcia v. Comm'r
2016 T.C. Memo. 21 (U.S. Tax Court, 2016)
Natkunanathan v. Commissioner
2015 T.C. Memo. 106 (U.S. Tax Court, 2015)
SWF Real Estate LLC v. Comm'r
2015 T.C. Memo. 63 (U.S. Tax Court, 2015)
Dault v. Shaw
322 P.3d 84 (Alaska Supreme Court, 2013)
Ratledge v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
958 F. Supp. 2d 827 (E.D. Tennessee, 2013)
Zilberberg v. Comm'r
2011 T.C. Memo. 5 (U.S. Tax Court, 2011)
Hollingsworth v. Comm'r
2010 T.C. Memo. 262 (U.S. Tax Court, 2010)
Evans v. Comm'r
2010 T.C. Memo. 207 (U.S. Tax Court, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
331 F.2d 600, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-daniel-wesley-harris-ca6-1964.