From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Laughters v. United States

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Apr 12, 1946
155 F.2d 29 (6th Cir. 1946)

Opinion

No. 10027.

April 12, 1946.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Kentucky; Hiram Church Ford, Judge.

Burton Laughters was convicted of perjury, and he appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

T.R. Bandy, of Kingsport, Tenn., and Hobart F. Atkins, of Knoxville, Tenn. for appellant.

Claude P. Stephens, U.S. Atty., of Lexington, Ky., for appellee.

Before SIMONS, ALLEN and MILLER, Circuit Judges.


The appellant was indicted for perjury in giving false evidence under oath in the criminal case of another who had been charged with violation of ceiling prices established by the Office of Price Administration. The false swearing consisted in a denial by the appellant that he had told two government agents that he had purchased from the defendant various quantities of liquor at prices in excess of those established by law.

The only meritorious question that we perceive in the record is whether perjury can be predicated upon statements contrary to the sworn statement of the witness made orally prior thereto and proved by two credible witnesses. It is clear that the present issue is not the mere making of contradictory and inconsistent statements concerning these conversations, but in swearing falsely that such conversations were not had, and is controlled by the decision in United States v. Harris, 311 U.S. 292, 61 S.Ct. 217, 85 L.Ed. 196, and not by Phair v. United States, 3 Cir., 60 F.2d 953, or Clayton v. United States, 4 Cir., 284 F. 537.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Laughters v. United States

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Apr 12, 1946
155 F.2d 29 (6th Cir. 1946)
Case details for

Laughters v. United States

Case Details

Full title:LAUGHTERS v. UNITED STATES

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Date published: Apr 12, 1946

Citations

155 F.2d 29 (6th Cir. 1946)

Citing Cases

Smith v. United States

Upon factual comparison of the Galanos case with this one, we find no similarity of such nature as to…