331 F.2d 600 - United States v. Harris — 331 F.2d 600

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently February 2025

2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Melvin Schaengold, Cincinnati, Ohio, on brief for appellant.

¶2Joseph P. Kinneary, U. S. Atty., Charles G. Heyd, Asst. U. S. Atty., Cincinnati, Ohio, on brief for appellee.

¶3Before MILLER and EDWARDS, Circuit Judges, and McALLISTER, Senior Circuit Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5The defendant, Daniel Wesley Harris, was convicted on June 13, 1963, under a one-count indictment charging him with the illegal possession of nontaxpaid whis*601key in Lincoln Heights, Ohio, in the Southern District of Ohio, in violation of Sections 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a) (1), Title 26, United States Code. The District Judge overruled defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal under Rule 29, Rules of Criminal Procedure.

¶6On this appeal defendant concedes that there was undisputed evidence that the alleged offense took place in Hamilton County, Ohio. However, the record also shows that no evidence was introduced showing that Hamilton County, Ohio, was in the Southern District of Ohio. The defendant contends that the Government failed to prove venue in the Southern District of Ohio, as charged in the indictment.

¶7The District Judge instructed the jury that “Hamilton County, Ohio is located in .said Southern District of Ohio.” The defendant contends that the District Judge was not authorized to so charge the jury.

¶8 We think the instruction was a proper one. The District Court may take judicial notice of established geographical facts. Krench v. United States, 42 F.2d 354, 355, C.A. 6th; Weaver v. United States, 298 F.2d 496, 499, C.A. 5th; Rutherford v. United States, 264 F.2d 180, 186, C.A. 9th; United States v. Echeles, 222 F.2d 144, 158, C.A. 7th, cert. denied, 350 U.S. 828, 76 S.Ct. 58, 100 L.Ed. 739, rehearing denied, 350 U.S. 905, 76 S.Ct. 176, 100 L.Ed. 795.

¶9The District Court will also take judicial notice of the statutes of the United States. United States v. Fullard-Leo, 331 U.S. 256, 269, 67 S.Ct. 1287, 91 L.Ed. 1474; Louisville Gas & Electric Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 129 F.2d 126, 134, C.A. 6th, cert. denied, 318 U.S. 761, 63 S.Ct. 559, 87 L.Ed. 1133, rehearing denied, 318 U.S. 800, 63 S.Ct. 768, 87 L.Ed. 1164; Cohen v. United States, 129 F.2d 733, 736, C.A. 8th. Section 115(b) (1), Title 28, United States Code, provides that Hamilton ■County is in the Southern District of Ohio.

¶10Nor is it necessary that the Court he requested to take judicial notice of a fact before it is authorized to do so. The Court may take judicial notice sua sponte. Weaver v. United States, supra, 298 F.2d 496, 498, C.A. 5th; Mills v. Denver Tramway Corp., 155 F.2d 808, 812, C.A. 10th.

¶11The judgment is affirmed.