UNITED STATES
v.
BUZZO
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 charged with a federal crime involving a draft that may have required a stamp under federal law, but the jury verdict failed to establish the defendant's intent, which was essential to prove the offense. The Supreme Court set aside the verdict and dismissed the case because without a finding of intent, no valid judgment could be rendered regardless of whether the stamp requirement had been satisfied.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice BBADXEY delivered the opinion of the court.
As in this case the intent is the essence of the crime,§ and is not found, no judgment can be entered on the verdict, whether, the facts disclosed therein required a stamp to be-affixed to the draft or not. To decide the question proposed, therefore, would avail nothing. An imperfect verdict, or one on which no judgment can be rendered, must be set aside, and a venire de novo awarded.* The case must therefore be dismissed. It is proper to observe that in the case of United States v. Isham, † recently decided by this court, we held that no stamp is required on drafts of the kind above described, when not exceeding ten dollars in amqunt. Case dismissed. § 1 Bishop’s Criminal Procedure, \ 280, or 2d edition, 523; People v. Lehman, 2 Barbour, 218, 219. * Bacon’s Abridgment, title “Verdict” (M.); Tidd’s Practice, 922, 9th ed.; Holland v. Fisher, Orlando Bridgman, 187, 188. † 17 Wallace, 496. [The case had not been decided when the present one was argued. — Hep.]
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Mayer, 235 U.S. 55 (U.S. 1914)
-
Ex parte Wilson, 114 U.S. 417 (U.S. 1885)…cases of misdemeanor; though common enough in civil prosecutions for penalties and forfeitures.” Story on the Constitution, § 1780. The informations which passed without objection in United States v. Isham, 17 Wall. 496, and United States v. Buzzo, 18 Wall. 125, were .for violations of the stamp laws, punishable by fine only. And the offence which Mr. Justice Field and Judge Sawyer held in United States v. Waller, 1-Sawyer, 701; might be prosecuted by information, is there described as “ an offence not' ca…
-
United States v. Britton, 107 U.S. 655 (U.S. 1882)…ppears that all the counts from the thirty-seventh to the one hundred and eighteenth, inclusive, are [*671] insufficient and bad. We therefore decline to answer the third and fourth questions, which relate to the same counts. United States v. Buzzo, 18 Wall. 125.…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence