Downing

Downing v. United States

Good Law
35 F.2d 454·1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 2986
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 30, 1929No. 5891California3,305 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Dietrich, J.

In the first five counts of the indictment, the appellants, Downing, Anderson, and Gunther, and their eodefendant, Collins, were charged with using the mails to defraud, under section 215 of the Penal Code (18 USCA § 338), and in the sixth, with a conspiracy to commit such offenses. Upon the first five counts all were convicted but upon the sixth they were acquitted. Erom the judgment entered upon the verdict all but Collins prosecute appeals.

The several counts relate to the same enterprise and in form are substantially identical ; their sufficiency is not challenged. Appellants reside and resided in or near Portland, Or. Downing was a mining engineer, Gunther t a retail merchant, and Anderson a bond and stockbroker. The enterprise involved had to do with the development and operation of some old mining properties near Las Cruces, N. M., known as the Bennett-Stevenson Group. At the time the enterprise was set on foot, no one of the appellants had ever seen the mine or had any personal knowledge in respect to it. Directly or indirectly the properties were brought to their attention through the representations of their codefendant, Collins, who held a contract for their purchase…

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.