Cantwell

Cantwell v. United States

Good Law
81 F.2d 31·1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 3956
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 13, 1935No. 7958California422 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Matpiews, J.

Appellant was indicted for selling intoxicating liquor to an Indian ward of the United States ( 25 U.S.C.A. § 241 ), and, having been convicted and sentenced, prosecutes this appeal.

At the close of the government’s case and again at the conclusion of all the evidence, appellant moved the court for a directed verdict. The denial of that motion is assigned as error. The ground of the motion, if any, is not stated in the record. Examination of the record discloses no ground on which it could properly have been granted. The verdict is amply sustained by the evidence. The facts which the evidence establishes, or tends strongly to establish, are as follows:

G. W. Magleby, an officer of the United States Indian Service, employed Bill Patrick and Steve Paya, Indian wards of the United States, to try to make purchases of intoxicating liquor from any person who might sell such liquor to either of them. The purpose of their employment was to cause the arrest and prosecution of any such person. Magleby furnished Patrick and Paya two marked $1 bills with which to make such purchases of liquor. Patrick and Paya went to appellant’s home, were met at the door by appellant, and thereupon asked…

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.