Pablo

Pablo v. United States

Good Law
155 C.C.A. 493·242 F. 905·1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1962
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 25, 1917No. 2873California763 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Hunt, J.

Joseph Pablo, plaintiff in error, was indicted in three counts for having at different times introduced liquor into the Flathead Indian reservation in Montana. He was tried and acquitted under two counts, but convicted under the third; and by writ of error ask's review in this court.

The first point made is that the court erred in allowing a witness to testify over the objection of'defendant’s counsel, who stated that Hunter was incompetent to testify, having been convicted and sentenced for a felony, which was not specified in the objection. It does not appear that any record of conviction accompanied the objection. Nevertheless, immediately after objection, the United States attorney stated to the court that he had “a telegram pardoning the witness and restoring him to citizenship.” The contents of the telegram are not incorporated in the record, but it is shown that the telegram was produced and read by the judge. Counsel for defendant stated that they could not question the telegram, but they did object to its being received as evidence “until the pardon itself was produced.” The court held that the telegram was a satisfactory showing of executive action and pardon, and added…

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.