Coppersmith v. United States

Appellant was convicted of operating an illicit distillery in violation of the internal revenue laws. His principal contention is that the proof was not sufficient to sustain the conviction; but, while the evidence was circumstantial, the circumstances were not denied or explained and pointed unmistakably to appellant’s guilt. In view of the rule that on motion for directed verdict, the evidence must be taken *354in the light most favorable to the prosecution, there can be no question as to its sufficiency. It may be briefly summarized as follows:

Officers of the government located a 500 gallon…