US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

BERRA V. UNITED STATES, 351 U. S. 131 (1956)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 351 U. S. 131 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Berra v. United States, 351 U.S. 131 (1956)

Berra v. United States

No. 60

Argued March 26, 1956

Decided April 30, 1956

351 U.S. 131


Petitioner was indicted for wilfully attempting to evade federal income taxes by filing with the Collector "false and fraudulent" tax returns in violation of 26 U.S.C. (1952 ed.) § 145(b). This, it is here assumed, is also a violation of 26 U.S.C. (1952 ed.) § 3616(a), the penalty for the violation of which is lesser than for a violation of § 145(b). Petitioner was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment greater than the maximum possible had the conviction been under § 3616(a).

Held: it was not error for the trial judge to refuse to give to the jury an instruction requested by petitioner that a verdict of guilty of the "lesser crime" under § 3616(a) would be permissible. Pp. 351 U. S. 132-135.

(a) It is here assumed, arguendo, that § 3616(a) is applicable to income tax returns. P. 351 U. S. 133.

(b) The contention that, since there was no difference in the proof required to establish violations of §§ 145(b) and 3616(a), the indictment must be taken as charging violations of both sections, and that, under Rule 31(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the jury should have been permitted to make the choice between the two crimes, cannot be sustained. Pp. 351 U. S. 133-134.

(c) Rule 31(c) was not intended to change the jury's traditional function of deciding only the issues of fact, and taking the law as given by the court. P. 351 U. S. 134.

(d) Whether § 3616(a), rather than § 145(b), should apply was not for the jury to determine. Pp. 351 U. S. 134-135.

221 F.2d 590 affirmed. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 351 U. S. 132

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™