Wyman v. United StatesAnnotate this Case
263 U.S. 14 (1923)
U.S. Supreme Court
Wyman v. United States, 263 U.S. 14 (1923)
Wyman v. United States
Argued October 4, 1923
Decided October 22, 1923
263 U.S. 14
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Decided upon the authority of Brede v. Powers, ante,263 U. S. 4.
Error to the District Court for the Eastern District of New York to review a judnent sentencing the plaintiff in error to imprisonment for 45 days in the Essex County Jail, Newark, New Jersey, for the offense of selling whisky for "beverage purposes," in violation of § 3, Title II, of the National Prohibition Act, 41 Stat. 305, 308. The prosecution was by information.
MR. JUSTICE McKENNA delivered the opinion of the Court.
Plaintiff in error was proceeded against by an information for the violation of a section of the National Prohibition Act.
A motion was made to dismiss the information on the ground that the crime charged was an infamous one within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in that, by reason of the statutes of the United States and those of New York and New Jersey, the court had power to impose an infamous punishment, namely imprisonment at hard labor and
imprisonment at involuntary labor, and that therefore Wyman could not be held to answer for such crime except upon presentment or indictment by a grand jury.
The motion was denied, and, after trial, plaintiff in error was found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 45 days in the Essex county jail, Newark, New Jersey.
To review this conviction and sentence is the purpose of this writ of error.
It will be observed that the case is identical in its legal aspects with No. 45, Brede v. Powers, ante,263 U. S. 4. For the reasons stated in the opinion in that case, the proceedings, action and judgment are
MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS and MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS concur in the result.
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.