Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Stanley Addison, of One 1957 Cadillac Convertible, Motor No. 5762- 098831, and General Motors Acceptance Corporation, 17046_1 (1958)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 17046_1 Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 07, 1958
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 260 F.2d 908 UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Stanley ADDISON, Claimant of One 1957 Cadillac Convertible, Motor No. 5762- 098831, and General Motors Acceptance Corporation, Appellees. No. 17046. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. Nov. 7, 1958. O. B. Cline, Jr., James L. Guilmartin, U.S. Atty. for Southern Dist. of Florida, David C. Clark, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for appellant. Dean Boggs, Jacksonville, Fla., Murray Goodman, Miami Beach, Fla., Boggs, Blalock & Holbro
More

260 F.2d 908

UNITED STATES of America, Appellant,
v.
Stanley ADDISON, Claimant of One 1957 Cadillac Convertible,
Motor No. 5762- 098831, and General Motors
Acceptance Corporation, Appellees.

No. 17046.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 7, 1958.

O. B. Cline, Jr., James L. Guilmartin, U.S. Atty. for Southern Dist. of Florida, David C. Clark, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for appellant.

Dean Boggs, Jacksonville, Fla., Murray Goodman, Miami Beach, Fla., Boggs, Blalock & Holbrook, Jacksonville, Fla., for appellees.

Before RIVES, TUTTLE and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

This case is in all respects controlled by our decision in United States v. One 1957 Oldsmobile Automobile, 5 Cir., 256 F.2d 931. The facts in that case, as in this, present in its starkest outline the rigidity and admitted severity of the provisions of 49 U.S.C.A. 782, requiring forfeiture of an automobile, not a common carrier, in which a passenger, without the knowledge of the owner or lienor, is committing or has committed a crime prohibited by 49 U.S.C.A. 781 (relating to narcotics crimes).

2

The language of the statute, however, is plain, and neither the District Court nor this Court is allowed any discretion in its application.

3

The judgment is reversed.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer