Rossi v. United States, 289 U.S. 89 (1933)

U.S. Supreme Court, (April 10, 1933)

Docket number: 594

/us/289/89/case.html

Linked as:

RSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Supreme Court - Rossi v. United States, 289 U.S. 89 (1933)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Oliver W. Arnold, Appellant., 358 F.2d 633 (4th Cir. 1966)

U.S. Supreme Court - United States v. Fleischman, 339 U.S. 349 (1950)

U.S. Supreme Court - Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 (1969)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Carl Turner Weaver, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 298 F.2d 496 (5th Cir. 1962)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Roy Lee Jacobs and Roy Thomas Taylor, Appellants. United States of America, Appellee, v. Dacie Bass, Appellant., 386 F.2d 170 (4th Cir. 1967)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Allen Carr, Appellant., 582 F.2d 242 (2nd Cir. 1978)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leon Goodson, Defendant-Appellant., 439 F.2d 1056 (5th Cir. 1971)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Angelo Costanzo, Defendant-Appellant., 581 F.2d 28 (2nd Cir. 1978)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Robert E. West, Appellant., 666 F.2d 16 (2nd Cir. 1981)

See all citations to this document

Text:

U.S. Supreme Court ROSSI v. UNITED STATES, 289 U.S. 89 (1933)

[Page 289 U.S. 89, 92]

uments or other evidence probably within the defendant's possession or control. See Chamberlayne's Modern Law of Evidence, vol. 2, 983; Greenleaf on Evidence (16th Ed.) vol. 1, 79, p. 154; Wilson v. United States, 162 U.S. 613, 619, 16 S.Ct. 895; Dunlop v. United States, 165 U.S. 486, 502, 503 S., 17 S.Ct. 375; Mobile, etc., Railroad v. Turnipseed, 219 U.S. 35, 42, 31 S.Ct. 136, 32 L.R. A. (N.S.) 226, Ann. Cas. 1912A, 463; Yee Hem v. United States, 268 U.S. 178, 185, 45 S.Ct. 470.

The only decision called to our attention which seems in conflict with those cited above is Mansbach v. United States (C.C.A.) 11 F.(2d) 221, 223, 224. And with the doctrine there apparently approved, so far as in conflict with the commonly accepted view, we cannot agree.

Affirmed. Footnotes

Footnote 1 ' 284. Every person intending to commence or to continue the business of a distiller shall ... before proceeding with such business ... execute a bond (with specified conditions). ... Every person who fails or refuses to give the bond hereinbefore required ... shall forfeit the distillery, distilling apparatus, and all real estate and premises connected therewith, and shall be fined not less than $500 nor more than $5,000, and imprisoned not less than six months nor more than two years.'

Footnote 2 ' 281. Every person having in his possession or custody, or under his control, any still or distilling apparatus set up, shall register the same. ... Stills and distilling apparatus shall be registered immediately upon their being set up. ... And every person having in his possession or custody, or under his control, any still or distilling apparatus set up which is not so registered, shall pay a penalty of $500, and shall be fined not less than $100, nor more than $1,000, and imprisoned for not less than one month, nor more than two years.'

If you are already a vLex customer, access here