Legal Document

423 U.S. 73 96 Supreme Court Reporter 307 46 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 215 Karl Judge BRAYv.UNITED STATES. Number 75-5182. Dec. 1, 1975. PER CURIAM. 1 On June 25, 1973, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) served a subpoena on petitioner, Bray, directing him to produce business records for examination and appear questioning in connection with an inquiry into possible violations of Economic Stabilization Act 1970, 84 Statutes-at-Large 799, as amended, 85 743, note following 12 Code KF62 § 1904 (1970 ed., Supp. III). When he failed comply, IRS filed petition enforcement District Utah. Following hearing, ordered comply subpoena. Upon his refusal testify or records, court directed show cause why should not be held criminal contempt. He was subsequently convicted contempt under 18 401 sentenced imprisonment 60 days.1 appealed judgment conviction Appeals Tenth Circuit, but that dismissed appeal want jurisdiction, holding came within exclusive jurisdiction conferred upon Temporary Emergency (TECA) by 211(b)(2) Act. This certiorari asks us review propriety dismissal Bray's appeal. 2 As part Amendments 1971, Congress created TECA vested it "exclusive all appeals from district courts cases controversies arising this title regulations orders issued thereunder." 211(b)(2), 749. judicial-review provision designed provide speedy resolution brought "to funnel one out Courts thus gain consistency decision." S.Rep.No.92-507, Page 10 (1971), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News Pages 2283, 2292. The carved limited exception broad over "appeals final decisions States." 28 1291. 3 Circuit that, "notwithstanding prosecution 401," charge did "change substantive nature original proceedings" therefore remained "a 'case controversy' (Economic Stabilization) Act." was, we think, misreading both language purpose stabilization statute. does contain any prohibiting violation court's order establishing penalties such violation. Thus, rather than "arising under" Act, commenced 401, Criminal empowers federal punish certain contempts their authority. Nothing its legislative history indicates intended include existing offenses, already covered Title 18, umbrella versus Cooper, 482 Federal Reporter, 2nd 1393, 1398 (TECA 1973).2 Review convictions relating compliance investigations efforts is necessary assure uniform interpretation provisions scheme. Indeed, requirement would only serve undermine prompt questions burdening additional appeals. 4 against petitioner based obey lawful initiated separate independent proceeding at law contempt, vindicate authority court" "not cause." Gompers Bucks Stove Range Co., 221 418, 445, 451, 31 492, 502, 55 L.Ed. 797. Although related entered investigation violations, dependent existence even continuation investigation. noted Mine Workers, 330 258, 294, 67 677, 696, 91 884: "Violations are punishable though set aside appeal, Worden Searls, 121 14, 7 814, 30 853 (1887), basic action has become moot, 319 797 (1911)." Here sentencing constituted decision then appealable appropriate We grant motion proceed forma pauperis certiorari, vacate judgment, remand case further proceedings consistent opinion. 5 Judgment vacated remanded. stayed execution pending In 1001 willfully knowingly making false representations agent controversy 'arising under' 1397.

Classification Label: 8