Document: 330 U.S. 160 67 S.Ct. 645 91 L.Ed. 818 BOZZAv.UNITED STATES. No. 190. Argued and Submitted Jan. 7, 1947. Decided Feb. 17, [Syllabus from pages 160-162 intentionally omitted] Mr. W. Marvin Smith, of Washington, D.C., for respondent. Harold Simandl, Newark, N.J., petitioner. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion Court. 1 The petitioner one Chirichillo were convicted in a Federal District Court on all counts five-count indictment against them which charged violation Internal Revenue laws connection with operation still. Appeals reversed petitioner's conviction four five because insufficient evidence, but affirmed as to one, two, three. 3 Cir., 155 F.2d 592. We granted certiorari. 329 698, 58. Count that defendants had carried 'the business distiller * intent willfully defraud United States tax spirits so distilled *' 26 U.S.C. § 2833(a), U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, 2833(a). two having possession custody still 2810(a), 2810(a). three they made fermented mash production alcohol 2834, 2834. It is argued evidence was support any here at issue. Government concedes its insufficiency 2 There testimony show following: rented farmhouse under an assumed name installed 300-gallon equipment necessary ferment distill alcohol. operated day night. himself mixed ingredients make attic 1/2-story frame building, distillation another part building. Petitioner house or times week. When there he took instructions helped him still; manufacture his products car illicitly would follow along behind car—sometimes petitioner's, sometimes helper's. where illicit appeared outside be deserted; windows without shades been practically stripped furniture. accept Government's concession fails this made, make, count All showed alone handled mash, nothing whatever indicate ever in, aided abetted, particular unlawful process manner, or, indeed, around stored there. statutes have broken down various steps phases continuous distilling each separate offense. Thus, these clearly carved out conduct making offense, thereby distinguishing it other offenses involving business. Consequently, prove offense must point directly within narrow margins statute d fines. One who neither engages specifically prohibited, nor aids abets it, does not violate section prohibits it. 4 sufficiency closer question. might possible helping abetted 'custody possession.' But very strained inference circumstances. Here again treat wholly distinct Yet no exercised, exercise of, control over distillery. His participation carrying finished product by fit category possession' nearly resembles transportation illegal liquor, 2803, 2803—an Circuit has found prove. Nor acted capacity calculated facilitate possession, such as, illustration, service caretaker, watchman, lookout, some similar capacity. Under circumstances, we judgment guilty should rendered second count. 5 think adequate finding guilt first taxes. certainly ample do 18 550, provides commit crime principal. jury right find, did, equally operating See v. Johnson, 319 503, 515, 518, 63 1233, 1239, 1240, 87 1546. 6 But, argued, knowledge distillery same purpose, however, applied almost, if quite, persuasive both defendants. assisted Chirichillo's conditions secretiveness apparently abandoned farmhouse. Newark followed car, petitioner's. members could properly draw their own experience observations lawful stills, unlike worked, usually are clandestinely deliver fashion employed here. precluded drawing inferences fraudulent purposes compelled believe oblivious what went him. Men box, like men street, can conclude person actively helps operate secret knows revenue laws. That well known object Doubtless few worked place, even heard about fail understand cry: 'The Revenuers coming!' hold verdict stand. 7 only sustained us carries minimum mandatory sentence fine hundred dollars imprisonment, In announcing morning session, trial judge mentioned imprisonment only. Thereafter taken briefly Marshal's office then local federal detention jail awaiting penitentiary finally confined. hours after announced, recalled according stipulation, stated presence counsel 'in imposition called my attention certain fines penalties I omitted impose. For record now will imposed.' Thus dollar fixed required law, sentence. charges action constituted double jeopardy forbidden Constitution. 8 established comply letter criminal authorizes erroneous may set aside appeal, Reynolds States, 98 145, 168, 169, Otto 25 244; Murphy Commonwealth Massachusetts, 177 155, 157, 20 639, 640, 44 711, habeas corpus proceedings. re Bonner, 151 242, 14 323, 38 149. those cases recognized excessive corrected, though prisoner already served term, absolute discharge prisoner, appropriate amendment invalid court original jurisdiction, least during term imposed.1 Cf. De Benque 66 App.D.C. 36, 85 202, 106 A.L.R. 839. light cases, fact twice before sentencing place hour interim cannot said constitute heretofore considered contends, inapplicable correction increases punishment. Benz, 282 304, 309, 51 113, 114, 75 354. If inadvertent error corrected manner used court, valid enforceable imposed all. Jordan 60 4, Barrow 54 128, 295 F. 949. This rejected 'doctrine whose regular verdict, escape punishment altogether committed passing sentence.' supra, page 260, 327, Constitution require game wrong move means immunity prisoner. King 69 10, 291, 296. case 'only authority do, substitute(d) directions law done upon offender.' did put offense.2 imposes instead 9 Other contentions merit our discussion. affirmed. 10 ordered. 11 Affirmed part. 12 DOUGLAS, MURPHY, RUTLEDGE dissenting affirmance one. 13 view convict aider abetter engaging 'to defraud' spirits, 53 Stat. 319, shows act concealment promoted fraud, advice furthered scheme, interest project.1 Cooper, Fed.Cas. 627, 629, 14,863; Logan, 900, 992, 15,624; Seiden 16 197, 199; Partson 127, 129; Anderson 30 485, 487. Aiding abetting liquor thing.2 quite different matter, requires test, blended. given jury3 seem inadequate sustain charging Bozza aiding fraud scheme. conclusion, reserves expression concerning legality Compare Rule 45(c), Rules Criminal Procedure Courts following 687. Ex parte Lange, Wall. 163, 21 872, relied here, defendant sentenced authorized imprisonment. Since paid therefore suffered sentence, held 'executed full satisfaction alternative *.' 160, 641, 711. Therefore, Lange's plea, correct sentenc causing suffer punishment, sustained. Bradley, 318 50, 470, 500. until announced fine. Judge Learned Hand, reviewing definitions abetting, said: 'It observed probability result accessory's conduct; demand sort associate venture, participate something wishes bring about, seek succeed. words used—even most colorless, 'abet'—carry implication purposive attitude towards it.' Peoni, 100 401, 402. 2833(a) makes 'carry bond law.' Section 2834 distillation, building premises than '* you find merely underling, serving beck call employer more (sic) justify your engaged distiller. logically business, chargeable committing effect assisting furthering transaction. Before government beyond reasonable doubt transaction, time knew commission, aid abet transaction.' While above requested defendant, nevertheless feel failure satisfy standard suggest notice. Sibbach Wilson & Co., 312 1, 16, 61 422, 427, 479.

Category: 0