United States v. Rubin

Second Circuit

United States v. Rubin

49 F.2d 273, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 3204

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedApril 20, 1931

DocketNo. 369

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 F.2d 273 (United States v. Rubin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second 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. Rubin, 49 F.2d 273, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 3204 (2d Cir. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial was upon the two counts together ; the evidence proved that the defendant had deputed two persons to carry the liquors from his malt shop to the place appointed for delivery by the decoy who arranged the sale. The points argued do not require discussion, since the persons deputed to carry the liquors testified to the facts upon their own defense and proved the case against Rubin beyond question.

It was, however, erroneous to convict upon both counts, because the possession was of the same liquors transported and was laid as being in the motor which did the transporting. Schroeder v. U. S., 7 F.(2d) 60 (C. C. A. 2); Schechter v. U. S., 7 F.(2d) 881 (C. C. A. 2); Friedman v. U. S., 13 F. (2d) 632 (C. C. A. 6); Segurola v. U. S., 16 F.(2d) 563 (C. C. A. 1); Brown v. U. S., 16 F.(2d) 682 (C. C. A. 1).

Conviction on first count reversed; conviction on second count affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial was upon the two counts together ; the evidence proved that the defendant had deputed two persons to carry the liquors from his malt shop to the place appointed for delivery by the decoy who arranged the sale. The points argued do not require discussion, since the persons deputed to carry the liquors testified to the facts upon their own defense and proved the case against Rubin beyond question.

It was, however, erroneous to convict upon both counts, because the possession was of the same liquors transported and was laid as being in the motor which did the transporting. Schroeder v. U. S., 7 F.(2d) 60 (C. C. A. 2); Schechter v. U. S., 7 F.(2d) 881 (C. C. A. 2); Friedman v. U. S., 13 F. (2d) 632 (C. C. A. 6); Segurola v. U. S., 16 F.(2d) 563 (C. C. A. 1); Brown v. U. S., 16 F.(2d) 682 (C. C. A. 1).

Conviction on first count reversed; conviction on second count affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 F.2d 273, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 3204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rubin-ca2-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack