UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
RICHARD HAROLD TOUS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
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.
A conviction for possessing an unregistered machine gun does not require proof of interstate commerce, and ignorance of amnesty provisions is not a defense.
Defendant was convicted under 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) for possessing an unregistered machine gun. He appealed his conviction and sentence.…
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 Possession Of An Unregistered Machine Gun cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from a conviction under 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) (possessing an unregistered machine gun) and a sentence of one year’s probation. We affirm.
The first point asserts that a conviction cannot stand without evidence that the defendant received or transported the firearm through interstate commerce. Interstate activity, however, is not an element of the crime under 26 U.S.C. § 5861. The statute is silent on the score of commerce. It is a valid exercise of the power of Congress to tax. United States v. Giannini, 455 F. 2d 147 (9th Cir. 1972).
The second point is that, be- • cause he was unaware of the statute’s amnesty and registration provision, the defendant was unable to comply with the registration clause of the statute. Ignorance o,f the statute’s amnesty provisions is no defense. Congress can impose upon those who keep machine guns a reasonable duty to inquire about the obligations that may accompany such possession. See United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601, 609-610, 91 S.Ct. 1112, 28 L.Ed.2d 356 (1971).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Alverson, 666 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1982)
-
United States v. Petrucci, 486 F.2d 329 (9th Cir. 1973)
-
United States v. Hale, 978 F.2d 1016 (8th Cir. 1992)
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601 (U.S. 1971)
- United States v. Ezio Giannini and Charlotte Giannini, 455 F.2d 147 (9th Cir. 1972)