Willie Bill Gant, Alias Wiley Gant, and Ulysses Gant, Alias Junior Gant v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Willie Bill Gant, Alias Wiley Gant, and Ulysses Gant, Alias Junior Gant v. United States

250 F.2d 40

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedNovember 14, 1957

Docket15215

StatusPublished

This text of 250 F.2d 40 (Willie Bill Gant, Alias Wiley Gant, and Ulysses Gant, Alias Junior Gant v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Willie Bill Gant, Alias Wiley Gant, and Ulysses Gant, Alias Junior Gant v. United States, 250 F.2d 40 (9th Cir. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Both appellants were indicted on three counts, charging: in Count I, that appellants encouraged and induced Martha Harand, an alien whom appellants knew was not entitled to enter the United States, to come from Canada to Seattle, Washington; in Count II, that appellants, knowing Martha Harand was not entitled to reside in the United States, willfully and unlawfully concealed, harbored and shielded her from the immigration authorities and from observation to prevent her discovery as an alien; and, in Count III, that appellants kept and harbored Martha Harand for the purpos *41 es of prostitution, although she was an alien entering from Canada, and did not file a statement to that effect as required by law.

The cause was tried to a jury, which returned a verdict of guilty as to each appellant. Judgment and sentence were thereafter entered as to each.

There are no legal grounds for either appeal. The questions urged before this Court related to the facts and the credibility of the witnesses. Certain improbabilities in the evidence are also urged upon us. But all these matters were foreclosed by the verdict of the jury. The trial judge entered the judgment and sentenced appellants.

Vfe should commend counsel for appellants, who was appointed by the trial court but who, at his own expense, appeared before this Court and presented an able argument for appellants.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Both appellants were indicted on three counts, charging: in Count I, that appellants encouraged and induced Martha Harand, an alien whom appellants knew was not entitled to enter the United States, to come from Canada to Seattle, Washington; in Count II, that appellants, knowing Martha Harand was not entitled to reside in the United States, willfully and unlawfully concealed, harbored and shielded her from the immigration authorities and from observation to prevent her discovery as an alien; and, in Count III, that appellants kept and harbored Martha Harand for the purpos *41 es of prostitution, although she was an alien entering from Canada, and did not file a statement to that effect as required by law.

The cause was tried to a jury, which returned a verdict of guilty as to each appellant. Judgment and sentence were thereafter entered as to each.

There are no legal grounds for either appeal. The questions urged before this Court related to the facts and the credibility of the witnesses. Certain improbabilities in the evidence are also urged upon us. But all these matters were foreclosed by the verdict of the jury. The trial judge entered the judgment and sentenced appellants.

Vfe should commend counsel for appellants, who was appointed by the trial court but who, at his own expense, appeared before this Court and presented an able argument for appellants.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 F.2d 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willie-bill-gant-alias-wiley-gant-and-ulysses-gant-alias-junior-gant-v-ca9-1957.