1340
Drafting IndictmentsTheft from Interstate
Shipment
-- Facility from Which the Goods Were Taken
|
A split exists in the Circuits on the issue of whether the
indictment
must specifically allege the facility from which the goods were taken. The
court
in United States v. Manuszak, 234 F.2d 421 (3d Cir. 1956) held that
an
indictment which does not specify the facility from which the merchandise
was
taken is fatally defective. Other courts have disagreed, reasoning that the
purpose of the statute is to protect every conceivable instrumentality of
interstate transportation thus obviating a need to specify the particular
facility involved. See United States v. Wora, 246 F.2d 283
(2d
Cir. 1957); United States v. Spivey, 448 F.2d 390 (4th Cir. 1971);
Dunson v. United States, 404 F.2d 447 (9th Cir. 1968); United
States
v. Richardson, 694 F.2d 251 (11th Cir. 1982). To avoid appellate
issues,
indictments should allege the facility from which the goods were taken.
[cited in USAM 9-61.300] | |