Meyer

Meyer v. United States

Good Law
135 C.C.A. 564·220 F. 800·1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 2522
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 15, 1915No. 2413California1,365 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Woeverton, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1] The strong contention of counsel for defendants is that the object and purposes of the conspiracy ended with the delivery of Paymaster Orr’s check to Goldberg or Silverstone on May 26,1908, and that whatever was done thereafter in the disposal of the check by and between the alleged conspirators was mere private arrangement between them by way of settlement, and was not potent in any way in effectuating the object and purposes of the alleged conspiracy, and therefore, the indictment having been found and returned May 31, 1911, the offense charged was barred by the statute of limitations of three years from the date of commission. The contention is thought to be the more persuasive inasmuch as it is alleged, among other things, by the indictment, indicating in part the things that Kettlewell should do in carrying out the unlawful scheme, as follows:

In contemplation of section 5440, R. S., a conspiracy may be entered into “to defraud the United States in any manner or for any purpose.” The indictment is drawn under this clause. That a conspiracy attended with appropriate acts and conditions may consist of a continuing offense has been…

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.