Cochran

In their petition for a rehearing, the appellants assert that the appellant Cochran “cannot be guilty of the offense charged,” which this court has found was committed in the Eastern District of Washington, Northern Division, “for the simple reason.that he was not in the Eastern District of Washington, Northern Division; at any of the times set forth in the indictment, as was uneontradietedly established by the evidence.”

The appellants also contend that “it is elementary that a person not in the state where the alleged offense is charged to have been committed cannot be guilty of such offense in that state.”

We think that this is an erroneous statement of the law.

In Burton v. United States, 202 U. S. 344, 387 , 26 S. Ct. 688, 701 , 50 L. Ed. 1057 , 6 Ann. Cas. 362, the court said: “The constitutional requirement is that the crime shall be tried in the state and district where committed; not necessarily in the state or district where the party committing it happened to be at the time.” See, also, In re Palliser, 136 U. S. 257, 265 , 10 S. Ct. 1034 , 34 L. Ed. 514 ; Horner v. United States, 143 U. S. 207, 213-214 , 12 S. Ct. 407 , 36 L. Ed. 126 ; Hyde v. United States, 225 U.…