Hoagland

Hoagland v. United States

Good Law
28 F.2d 871·1928 U.S. App. LEXIS 2487
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 29, 1928No. 5472California451 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rudkin, J.

The indictment in this ease charges a conspiracy to willfully, unlawfully, feloniously, and knowingly import into, and to sell, transport, deliver, and possess in, the United States, in *872 toxicating liquors fit for beverage purposes, and the commission of numerous overt acts to effect the object of the conspiracy. A demurrer to the indictment was overruled, and a demand for a bill of particulars was denied. At the close of the testimony the defendants moved for an instructed verdict of not guilty, and this was denied. On the trial, a verdict of guilty was returned by the jury, and the present writ of error was sued out on behalf of certain of the defendants, to review the judgment of conviction. The only errors assigned are based on the rulings above set forth.

The objection to the indictment is that it charges that the sale, transportation, and possession of intoxicating liquor in the United States was felonious, whereas such aets are misdemeanors only. But the employment of the term “felonious” or “feloniously,” in an indictment or information charging a misdemeanor, does not vitiate it. 31 C. J. 700, 701.

The indictment and demand for a bill of particulars are in all…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.