United States v. Pearl v. Williams

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Pearl v. Williams

355 F.2d 516, 17 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 301, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 26, 1966

Docket10080_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 355 F.2d 516 (United States v. Pearl v. Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth 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. Pearl v. Williams, 355 F.2d 516, 17 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 301, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (4th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Convicted of evasion of income taxes, the defendant complains of the admission of testimony tending to prove that she was the proprietress of a brothel. She had reported income from rentals and from race horses which she owned, and the testimony about her endeavors in aid of the professional activities of the young ladies who resided in her apartment house was offered to show an independent source of income in support of the net worth computations which had been introduced. As such, it was highly relevant, and it was not made inadmissible because of its tendency to prove her guilty of crimes other than tax evasion.

It is complained that the testimony does not show that patrons of the establishment remitted their fees directly to the defendant. An undercover agent testified that he was instructed by the defendant to pay the girl, who, by the defendant’s prearrangement, was about to become his temporary partner. It may be inferred, however, that financial gain did attend her performance of her role as mistress of the place. Moreover, there was testimony that she had sought to explain her failure to report such income by fear that it would involve her in collateral difficulties.

We conclude that receipt of this testimony was unexceptionable.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Convicted of evasion of income taxes, the defendant complains of the admission of testimony tending to prove that she was the proprietress of a brothel. She had reported income from rentals and from race horses which she owned, and the testimony about her endeavors in aid of the professional activities of the young ladies who resided in her apartment house was offered to show an independent source of income in support of the net worth computations which had been introduced. As such, it was highly relevant, and it was not made inadmissible because of its tendency to prove her guilty of crimes other than tax evasion.

It is complained that the testimony does not show that patrons of the establishment remitted their fees directly to the defendant. An undercover agent testified that he was instructed by the defendant to pay the girl, who, by the defendant’s prearrangement, was about to become his temporary partner. It may be inferred, however, that financial gain did attend her performance of her role as mistress of the place. Moreover, there was testimony that she had sought to explain her failure to report such income by fear that it would involve her in collateral difficulties.

We conclude that receipt of this testimony was unexceptionable.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

355 F.2d 516, 17 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 301, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-pearl-v-williams-ca4-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack