Richard Ingling v. United States

Appellant pleaded guilty to three counts of an indictment charging him with causing to be transported in interstate commerce a forged security in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 2314 & 2311. Judgment of conviction and sentence to a term of imprisonment were entered. He now seeks relief from such judgment of imprisonment by petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 .

Appellant asserts that the indictment charging him with transportation of a forged security, to which charge he pleaded guilty, fails to charge a public offense, and hence the trial court was without jurisdiction to impose the sentence he is now serving. The pertinent part of the indictment reads:

The statute under which the indictment was brought reads in part:

Congress has undertaken to define what constitutes a security, and in 18 U.S.C.A. § 2311 we find one of the definitions to be, “any * * * evidence of indebtedness * * * or, in general, any instrument commonly known as a ‘security,' * * * *."

Hence, if it can reasonably be said that under certain circumstances the charge invoice was an evidence of indebtedness, then the indictment charged a public offense. It may be that the charge invoice was stamped with an…