UNITED STATES
v.
MESA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The defendant was indicted for unlawfully exporting munitions of war (Winchester rifle cartridges) from El Paso, Texas to Ciudad Juárez, Mexico in violation of federal law. The trial court sustained a demurrer and quashed the indictment, and the Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal based on its decision in the companion case of United States v. Chavez, reversing any conviction on the same legal grounds.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice White delivered the opinion of the court.
The defendant in error was indicted upon the charge that within the jurisdiction of the court he “did unlawfully, knowingly, wilfully and with intent to export the munitions of war hereinafter described from the said city of El Paso to Ciudad Juarez, in Mexico, make a certain shipment of certain munitions of war, to-wit: three thousand (3,000) Winchester rifle cartridges of the calibre 44; that is to say,' did make a shipment of said munitions of war from said city of El Paso and with said Ciudad Juarez, in Mexico, as the destination of said shipment, by transporting the same in a wagon from a point,” etc. A demurrer to the indictment was heard along with the demurrer to the indictment in the case against Chavez, which we have just decided. The demurrer was sustained and the indictment quashed upon the opinion rendered in the Chavez Case. The ruling which we have just made in that case is therefore applicable to this and necessitates a reversal.
Judgment reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
United States v. Simpson, 252 U.S. 465 (U.S. 1920)…ntroduction could be effected only through transportation, and whether this took one form or another it was transportation in interstate commerce. Kelley v. Rhoads, 188 U. S. 1; United States v. Chavez, 228 U. S. 525, 532-533; United States v. Mesa, 228 U. S. 533; Pipe Line Cases, 234 U. S. 548, 560; United States v. Hill, 248 U. S. 420. The statute makes no distinction between different modes of transportation and we think it was intended to include them all, that being [*467] the natural import of its wor…
-
Morris Plan Indus. Bank of N.Y. v. Schorn, 135 F.2d 538 (2d Cir. 1943)…consequence that an attempted repayment by the bankrupt prior to bankruptcy is a preference, except where made from the very property taken, Walser v. International Union Bank, 2 Cir., 21 F. 2d 294, 298; Clarke v. Rogers, 228 U.S. 534, 33 S.Ct. 587, 57 L.Ed. 953, affirming 1 Cir., 183 F. 518; 3 Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th Ed., 814-818; 4 Id. 1058; T.W.S., 32 Yale L.J. 267. The rule applies even to property which the bankrupt had held in trust. See 4 Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th Ed., 1141-9, 1207-15, with cas…
-
Zack Stamp v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am., 908 F.2d 1375 (7th Cir. 1990)…es of contract and torts committed in the course of fiduciary relationships were treated as debts even though the obligation was not liquidated until after the petition in bankruptcy. See Clarke v. Rogers, 228 U.S. 534, 542-44, 33 S.Ct. 587, 588-89, 57 L.Ed. 953 (1913); Grant Shoe Co. v. Laird, 212 U.S. 445, 29 S.Ct. 332, 53 L.Ed. 591 (1909); Tindle v. [*1383] Birkett, 205 U.S. 183, 186, 27 S.Ct. 493, 494, 51 L.Ed. 762 (1907); Crawford v. Burke, 195 U.S. 176, 187, 25 S.Ct. 9, 11, 49 L.Ed. 147 (1904). Unea…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence