William Mays v. United States

Defendant William Mays appeals from a judgment of conviction upon the verdict of the jury finding him guilty of the offense charged in the second count of an indictment. Count Two charged a violation of § 95a of Title 12 U.S.C.A. as follows:

The regulations promulgated pursuant to Executive Order No. 6260, 12 U. S.C.A. § 95a note, authorized by said § 95a define gold bullion as follows: [ 31 C.F.R. § 54.4 (9)]

The points relied upon are as follows;

The question as to whether the exhibits constituted gold bullion is obviously a question of fact. United States v. Levy, 2 Cir., 137 F.2d 778 . In so treating the question and considering certain expert testimony, the Court, 137 F.2d on page 781, had the following to say:

As in the Levy case, we find here expert testimony that the contents of Government’s. Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 were generally considered gold bullion.

Mr. Charles John Hansen, a jeweler and dealer in specimen minerals, in response to questions of Assistant United States Attorney Manuel L. Real, testified [Rep.Tr. pp. 90-P and 90-Q]:

Mr. John R. Carr, Assistant Assayer since 1940 at the United States Mint in San Francisco, California, called as a witness-for plaintiff,…