Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

21 F.2d 1015

Docket No. 4969.

Mancuso v. United States

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided October 15, 1927.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1927-10-15

2 counsel of record

Relies on Weaver v. United States · Martin v. United States

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1927-10-15

¶1In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio; Paul Jones, Judge.

¶2Oscar Klekner, of Akron, Ohio, for plaintiff in error.

¶3*1016Howell Leuek, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Cleveland, Ohio (A. E. Bernsteen, U. S. Atty., of Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for the United States.

¶4Before DENISON and MOORMAN, Circuit Judges, and RAYMOND, District Judge.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6Reversed, on authority of Weaver v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 15 F.(2d) 38, and Martin v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 20 F.(2d) 785. If it might be thought that the indictment here was sufficient because, not negativing sales of stamped narcotics, it would have permitted proof that Mancuso was selling stamped packages, and was therefore a dealer required to register, yet there is no proof to that effect in the record, nor was any package sold offered in evidence. In any event, and for lack of such proof, there should have been a directed verdict.

/21/f2d/1015 · .json · Public domain