Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 70 views

    US V KEITEL DIGEST

    Uploaded by

    Andrew Nacita
    The Supreme Court granted in part and denied in part the motions to quash the indictment. The Court reversed the order quashing the first count, which charged conspiracy under a federal statute, finding the alleged acts could constitute defrauding the United States. However, the Court affirmed the order quashing the second count, which charged conspiracy under a different statute, as that statute only applied to pension and bounty land claims, not the coal land entries alleged. The Court remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its interpretation of the statutes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    US V KEITEL DIGEST

    Uploaded by

    Andrew Nacita
    70 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court granted in part and denied in part the motions to quash the indictment. The Court reversed the order quashing the first count, which charged conspiracy under a federal statute, finding the alleged acts could constitute defrauding the United States. However, the Court affirmed the order quashing the second count, which charged conspiracy under a different statute, as that statute only applied to pension and bounty land claims, not the coal land entries alleged. The Court remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its interpretation of the statutes.

    Original Title

    US-v-KEITEL-DIGEST

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court granted in part and denied in part the motions to quash the indictment. The Court reversed the order quashing the first count, which charged conspiracy under a federal statute, finding the alleged acts could constitute defrauding the United States. However, the Court affirmed the order quashing the second count, which charged conspiracy under a different statute, as that statute only applied to pension and bounty land claims, not the coal land entries alleged. The Court remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its interpretation of the statutes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    70 views2 pages

    US V KEITEL DIGEST

    Uploaded by

    Andrew Nacita
    The Supreme Court granted in part and denied in part the motions to quash the indictment. The Court reversed the order quashing the first count, which charged conspiracy under a federal statute, finding the alleged acts could constitute defrauding the United States. However, the Court affirmed the order quashing the second count, which charged conspiracy under a different statute, as that statute only applied to pension and bounty land claims, not the coal land entries alleged. The Court remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its interpretation of the statutes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNITED STATES v.

    KEITEL • The Court GRANTED the motions to quash the


    indictment on the grounds that:
    No. 286.
    o The first count related exclusively to cash
    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES entries of coal lands under § 2347, Rev. Stat.
    Under this, no affidavits or papers were
    DOCTRINE: INTERPRETATION & CONSTRUCTION OF required other than the application to
    STATUTES purchase, and therefore that all the allegations
    FACTS: of the count respecting false and fictitious
    affidavits, papers, etc., related to documents
    • The United States prosecutes this writ of error upon required solely by the rules and regulations of
    the assumption that the decision of the District the Land Department, which, not being
    Court was based upon an erroneous construction of expressly authorized by the statute, could
    the statutes upon which the indictment was founded. not form the basis of a criminal conspiracy.
    The indictment contained two counts.
    • The first count charged that the eleven defendants The coal land statutes did not prohibit one who
    illegally conspired, in violation of § 5440, Rev. Stat., was qualified to enter coal lands from making a
    with certain named persons and others unknown, to cash entry of such lands in his own name,
    illegally obtain the title of certain coal lands ostensibly for himself but really for the benefit
    belonging to the United States. This was to be done of another.
    by using various persons as agents to enter coal
    lands in their own name but in reality, for the use That a conspiracy to acquire coal lands from
    and benefit of the accused and a named organization. the United States by the means stated was
    • The second count charged an illegal conspiracy to do not a violation of § 5440, as the acts alleged did
    acts made criminal by § 4746, Rev. Stat., in making not constitute a defrauding of the United States
    and presenting, and causing to be made and presented, within the meaning of the word defraud as used
    in connection with the entries of coal land, certain in the second clause of the section.
    false, forged, fictitious, etc., affidavits and papers.
    • On behalf of the various defendants, motions to quash o As to the second count, it was decided that §
    the indictment were filed. 4746 embraced only affidavits, etc., relating
    to pension and bounty land claims, and the
    charge of a conspiracy to commit a crime in
    LOWER COURT RULING: violation of the section in question could not be
    based upon allegations of the use of false
    and fictitious papers, etc., in connection with sense embracing all that is properly covered by
    entries of coal lands. both, when each is used in a sense strictly and
    technically correct."
    ISSUES:
    1. W/N the court below merely held that the facts charged
    in the indictment were not within the statute, and
    therefore the indictment and not the statute was
    interpreted or construed
    2. W/N court below did not construe, but merely
    interpreted, the statutes

    HELD:
    The order quashing the first count was REVERSED and the
    order quashing the second count was AFFIRMED, and the
    case was REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER
    PROCEEDINGS in conformity to the opinion.
    1. YES. The court below demonstrates that the contention
    is devoid of all merit.
    2. YES. It is insisted that the construction of a statute is one
    thing and its interpretation another and different thing.
    The ruling of the court below might properly be classed,
    abstractly speaking, as an interpretation and not a
    construction of the statute.

    It may not be doubted that in common usage


    interpretation and construction are usually understood
    as having the same significance. This was aptly pointed
    out in Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, 6th edition,
    where, after stating the theoretical difference, it is
    observed (p. 51): "In common use, however, the word
    construction is generally employed in the law in a

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy