TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Reid v. United States

Reid v. United States, 136 F.2d 476 (5th Cir. 1943)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 17, 1943
Docket
No. 10624
Judges
Holmes, Hutcheson, Waller
Citations
136 F.2d 4761943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3068

Opinion of the Court — Holmes

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

HOLMES, Circuit Judge.

William Reid was convicted on an indictment in one count charging a violation of Section 89, 18 U.S.C.A. This statute provides that any person who knowingly and willfully deposits or causes to be deposited for conveyance in the mail or for delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier any document containing any threat to take the life of or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States, or who knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat against the President, shall upon conviction be fined or imprisoned or both.

There was proof, believed by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt, that Reid had publicly stated that he hated President Roosevelt, that if he had the time and money he would go to Washington and kill the President, and that if the President should ever come south he most certainly would kill him. His hearers believed that the remarks were made purposefully. There is evidence indicating that Reid preferred that the United States be ruled by Hitler, and that he had contacts with a high German official in this country.

That the offense created by the statute was charged and proven is not open to doubt. 1 Evidence as to appellant’s pro-German attitude was relevant to the issue as to whether the statements against the President were knowingly and willfully made, and was admissible. The charge of the court and the denial of the motion for a new trial have been considered and are free from error.

The judgment is affirmed.

United States v. Stickrath, D.C., 242 F. 151 ; Clark v. United States, 5 Cir., 250 F. 449 ; United States v. Stobo, D.C., 251 F. 689 ; United States v. Jasick, D.C., 252 F. 931, 933 ; Ragansky v. United States, 7 Cir., 253 F. 643 .

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1945: 11965: 11966: 11968: 11986: 12012: 119452026peak 1945 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. David L. Hoffman806 F.2d 703 (7th Cir. 1986)
  2. United States v. Goxcon-Chagal885 F. Supp. 2d 1118 (D.N.M. 2012)
  3. Robert Watts v. United States402 F.2d 676 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
  4. Normand P. Michaud v. United States350 F.2d 131 (10th Cir. 1965)
  5. Ray Dan Pierce v. United States365 F.2d 292 (10th Cir. 1966)
  6. Reid v. United States149 F.2d 334 (5th Cir. 1945)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Goxcon-Chagal885 F. Supp. 2d 1118 (D.N.M. 2012)
  2. United States v. David L. Hoffman806 F.2d 703 (7th Cir. 1986)
  3. Robert Watts v. United States402 F.2d 676 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
  4. Ray Dan Pierce v. United States365 F.2d 292 (10th Cir. 1966)
  5. Normand P. Michaud v. United States350 F.2d 131 (10th Cir. 1965)
  6. Reid v. United States149 F.2d 334 (5th Cir. 1945)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Stickrath, 242 F. 151 (S.D. Ohio 1917) 24
Ragansky v. United States, 253 F. 643 (7th Cir. 1918) 22
United States v. Stobo, 251 F. 689 (D. Del. 1918) 9
United States v. Jasick, 252 F. 931 (E.D. Mich. 1918) 9
Clark v. United States, 250 F. 449 (5th Cir. 1918) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list