Thomas Curtis Bush v. United States

267 F.2d 483 Thomas Curtis BUSH, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 15693. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. June 2, 1959. Thomas Curtis Bush, Texarkana, Tex., in pro. per. also brief by court appointed counsel Arthur Warner, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant. Laughlin E. Waters, U.S. Atty., T. Conrad Judd, Robert John Jensen, Asst. U.S. Attys., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee. Before CHAMBERS, BARNES and JERTBERG, Circuit Judges. BARNES, Circuit Judge. 1 Appellant was convicted by a jury of violating 18 U.S.C. 2421, which prohibits knowingly transporting a woman in interstate commerce for prostitution or any other immoral purpose. A new trial was denied appellant, and he was sentenced to three and one-half years imprisonment. 2 Transportation of the seventeen year old complaining witness in an auto owned by defendant from Texas to California was freely admitted by defendant. The two were accompanied on the trip by the defendant's wife. The latter was a prostitute, known to be such by defendant before he married her, and to his knowledge, engaged in that profession at the Dixie Hotel in Beaumont, Texas, when defendant first met the complaining witness…

Appellant was convicted by a jury of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2421 , which prohibits knowingly transporting a woman in interstate commerce for prostitution or any other immoral purpose. A new trial was denied appellant, and he was sentenced to three and one-half years imprisonment.

Transportation of the seventeen year old complaining witness in an auto owned by defendant from Texas to California was freely admitted by defendant. The two were accompanied on the trip by the defendant’s wife. The latter was a prostitute, known to be such by defendant before he married her, and to his knowledge, engaged in that profession at the Dixie Hotel in Beaumont, Texas, when defendant first met the complaining witness in Dallas, Texas.

The fact that the complaining witness engaged in prostitution immediately after her arrival jointly with defendant and his wife, in California, is likewise undisputed. Whether or not the complaining witness and the defendant engaged in immoral acts on the trip to, and *485 after arrival within, California is disputed.

Because of this undisputed testimony, much of it given by defendant himself, the sole issue remaining for solution was the intent of defendant —…

I concur in the result.