Legal Opinion · Dissent

James Stanley Pipes v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided November 1, 1968No. 24965_1Published

1DissentGodbold, Circuit Judge

I concur in the result. The indictment charged that appellant knew the laundry supervisor was a federal officer or employee. There was sufficient evidence that appellant had such knowledge, and the last paragraph of the majority opinion so states. Nothing more needed to be said.

I must record my dissent from the remainder of the opinion. It has long been the settled law of this circuit, rendered in head-on decisions, that in a prosecution under 18 U.S.C.A. § 111 it must be proved that the defendant had knowledge that the victim of his wrongful conduct was a federal officer. The unnecessary…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  2. McNabb v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. Ladner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Shapiro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. United States v. BalintSupreme Court of the United States · 1922

32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API