1440
Scienter for offenses under § 842
|
Because Congress intended § 842 to be utilized for regulatory
purposes, see H.R. Rep. No. 91-1549, 91st Cong., 2d Sess.,
reprinted
in 1970 U.S. Code Cong. and Adm. News 4007, 4042, Congress only
required,
with the exception of subsection (f), that violations under this section be
done
"knowingly." Note that subsections (j), (k), (l), (m), (n) and (o) fail to
State
the requisite scienter. In United States v. Collins, 949 F.2d 1029,
(8th
Cir. 1991), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
rejected
reading specific intent into a violation of § 842(j), and only required
knowledge that the commodity being handled was an explosive; a dangerous
commodity regulated in the interest of public safety. Cf. United
States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601, 609 (1971); United States v.
Langley,
62 F.3d 602, 605 (4th Cir. 1995). "[A]bsent a clear manifestation of
contrary
intent, a newly-enacted or revised statute is presumed to be harmonious with
existing law and its judicial construction." Estate of Wood v.
C.I.R.,
909 F.2d 270, 277 (8th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, with the exception of
subsection
(f), which requires proof of specific intent that defendant acted
"willfully,"
the scienter required under § 842 is that the offenses were committed
"knowingly."
[cited in USAM 9-63.900] | |