REID
v.
UNITED STATES
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 court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant knowingly and willfully made threats against the President, and that evidence of his pro-German attitude was relevant to intent.
William Reid was convicted of violating a statute that criminalizes threats against the President. Evidence showed Reid publicly stated he hated Presi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Relevance Of Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Hoffman, 806 F.2d 703 (7th Cir. 1986)
-
Normand P. Michaud v. United States, 350 F.2d 131 (10th Cir. 1965)
-
Watts v. United States, 402 F.2d 676 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence