Wilson v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Tom Wilson was convicted of a violation of section 8 of the act of December 17, 1914, familiarly known as the “Harrison Daw,” and the cause comes here upon writ of error to review the judgment.
1Opinion of the Court
LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.
There is no dispute about the facts. There was found in defendant’s possession a substantial quantity of opium. He admitted that he kept it solely for the purpose of smoking it; that whenever he desired to smoke he would take some of the opium found in his possession, “cook it,” and smoke it. He did not produce opium, nor import, nor manufacture, nor compound, nor deal in it. Nor did he dispense it, nor sell, distribute, or give it away. He was employed as a jewelry salesman; no physician had ever prescribed opium for him; he was not a nurse, nor a federal, state, or…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Latham v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1915
- United States v. ReedU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1852
- United States v. HeinzeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1910
- United States v. RockefellerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1914
- United States v. SimmonsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. GarssonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1923
- United States v. Amazon Industrial Chemical CorporationDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1931
- Metzler v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
- State v. KempSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- United States v. GoldmanDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1928
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.