|
|
United States v. Woodward, 469 U.S. 105 (1984)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States v. Woodward, 469 U.S. 105 (1984)
United States v. Woodward No. 83-1947 Decided January 7, 1985 469 U.S. 105
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
In passing through Customs at Los Angeles International Airport, respondent checked the "no" box of the usual form with respect to the question whether he or any family member was carrying over $5,000. However, after being questioned by customs officials and informed that he would be subjected to a search, he admitted that he and his wife were carrying over $20,000 cash, which they then produced. Respondent was subsequently convicted and sentenced to consecutive sentences in Federal District Court under two counts in an indictment charging him with the felony of making a false statement to a United States agency in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and with the misdemeanor of willfully failing to report that he was carrying more than $5,000 into the United States, in violation of 31 U.S.C. §§ 1058, 1101 (1976 ed.). Both counts were based on the same conduct -- answering "no" to the customs form question. However, the felony false statement conviction was reversed by the Court of Appeals, which held that Congress intended someone in respondent’s position to be punished only for the currency reporting misdemeanor. The court applied the rule of Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, for determining whether Congress intended to permit cumulative punishment -- that is, whether each statutory provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not -- and concluded that every currency reporting offense necessarily entails a violation of the false statement law.
Held: The Court of Appeals misapplied the Blockburger rule. Proof of a currency reporting violation does not necessarily include proof of a false statement offense, since § 1001 proscribes the nondisclosure of a material fact only if the fact is concealed "by any trick, scheme, or device," and a person could, without employing a "trick, scheme, or device," simply and willfully fail to file a currency disclosure report. There is no evidence that Congress did not intend to allow separate punishment for the two different offenses here. Moreover, Congress’ intent to allow punishment for both offenses is shown by the fact that the statutes are directed to separate evils.
Certiorari granted; 726 F.2d 1320, reversed in part and remanded.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Woodward, 469 U.S. 105 (1984) in 469 U.S. 105 469 U.S. 106. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=5IDCLZIKK4TNTEQ.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Woodward, 469 U.S. 105 (1984), in 469 U.S. 105, page 469 U.S. 106. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=5IDCLZIKK4TNTEQ.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Woodward, 469 U.S. 105 (1984). cited in 1984, 469 U.S. 105, pp.469 U.S. 106. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=5IDCLZIKK4TNTEQ.
|