|
United States v. Romano, 382 U.S. 136 (1965)
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. Romano, 382 U.S. 136 (1965)
United States v. Romano No. 2 Argued October 14, 1965 Decided November 22, 1965 382 U.S. 136
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Respondents, who were found by federal officers near an operating still, were indicted on three counts charging, in Count 1, the possession, custody and control of an illegal still in violation of 26 U.S.C. §5601(a)(1); in Count 2, the illegal production of distilled spirits in violation of § 5601 (a)(8); and, in Count 3, a conspiracy to produce distilled spirits. Respondents were convicted and given concurrent prison sentences on each count and fined on Count 1. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conspiracy convictions but reversed the substantive convictions, holding invalid under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment an instruction and statutory inference embodied therein based on §§5601(b)(1) and (4), which provide in part that presence of a defendant at an illegal still site shall be sufficient evidence to authorize conviction under §§ 5601(a)(1) and (8) unless he explains such presence to the jury’s satisfaction.
Held:
1. It is unnecessary to consider the validity of § 5601(b)(4) and the convictions under Count 2, since the sentences thereon were concurrent with the unchallenged sentences imposed on Count 3. P. 138.
2. The statutory inference in §5601 (b)(1) is invalid, since presence at an illegal still carries no reasonable inference of the crime of possession, custody, or control of the still proscribed by § 5601(a)(1). United States v. Gainey, 380 U.S. 63, distinguished. Pp. 139-144.
330 F.2d 566, affirmed.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Romano, 382 U.S. 136 (1965) in 382 U.S. 136 382 U.S. 137. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=6NHMDQ391UBU6DX.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Romano, 382 U.S. 136 (1965), in 382 U.S. 136, page 382 U.S. 137. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=6NHMDQ391UBU6DX.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Romano, 382 U.S. 136 (1965). cited in 1965, 382 U.S. 136, pp.382 U.S. 137. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=6NHMDQ391UBU6DX.
|