Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mcboyle V Us 10th Circuit PDF
Mcboyle V Us 10th Circuit PDF
6th and flew the airplane to Guymon, Okl., “(2) Thatwhich is used as the instru-
stopping en route at St. Joseph, Mo., and ment of conveyance or communication.”
Garden City, Kan. At Guymon, they com- Corpus Juris, vol. 42, p. 609, § 1, deflnes
municated with each other by telegraph and a. motor vehicle, as follows:
McBoyle instructed Lacey to sell or store
the stolen airplane and come back to Galeno.. “A Ímotor vehiele' is a vehicle operated
Th'ercupon, Laoey returned to Galena.. Mc~ bye power developed within itself and used
Boyle then gave Lacey $250 for expenscs for the'purpose of carryíng passengers or
and instructed Lacey to take an airplane of materials; and as the term is used in the
the same kind and make belonging to Mc- diifcrent statutes regulating such vehiclcs, it
Boyle back to Guymon and substitute it for is generally defined as including all vehicles
the stolen airplane. The purpose was to de- propclled by any power other than muscular
ceive the of'ficers when they found the Waco power, except traction engines, road rollers,
plane at Guymon. Laeey started back to and such motor vehioles as run only upon
Guymon with the second airplane but rails or tracks.”
crashed near Inman, Kan. Tlicreupon, La` Both the derivation and the definition of
cey returned to Galcna and continued to the word “vehicle” indicate that it is suflã-
work for McBoyle until the following De- cicntly broad to include any means or device
eember. by which persons or things are carried or
McBoe denied all of the factsincrim- transported, and it. is not limited to instru-
inating him except the scnding and reeeiving mentalities used for traveling on land, al-
of the telegrams. He testified that the tele- though the latter may be the limited or spe-
grams did not refer to the airplane but to cial meaning of the word. We do not think
liquor which Laeèy was supposed to have it would be inaccurate to say that a ship or
had in his possession in the airplane. vessel is a vehiele of commerce.
[1] The primary question is whether an An airplane is self-propelled, by means
airplane comes within the purvíew of the of a. gasoline motor. It is designed to carry
National Motor Vehicle Theft Act. This passengers and freight from place to place.
act defines the term “motor vehicle,” as fol- It runs partly on the ground but principally
lows: in the air. It furnishes a rapid means for
“The term 'motor vehicle' when used in transportation oi' persons and comparative-
this section shall include an automobile, au‹ ly light articles of freight and express. It
tomobile truck, automobile wagon, motor cy- therefore servos the same general purpose
cle, or any other self-propelled vehicle not as an automobile, automobile truck, or mo-
designed for running on rails.” torcycle. It is of the same general kind or
class as the motor vehicles specifically enu-
Counsel :for McBoyle contend that the merated in the statutory definition and,
word “vehicle” includes only conveyances therefore, construing an airplane to come
that travel on the ground; that an airplane within the general term, “any other self pro-
is not 'a vehicle but a ship; and that, under pelled vehiele,” does not offend against the
the doctrine of ejusdem generis, the phrase maxim-of ejusdem generis.
“any other self propelled vehicle” cannot be
Furthermore, some meaning must be
construed to include an airplane.
ascribed to the general phrase “any other
The Century Dictionary gives the deriva- self propelled vehicle,” which Congress wrote
tion of the word “vehícle” as follows: “F. into the act. It specifically enumerated all
Vehicule, L. Vehiculum,” meaning a “con- of the known selñpropelled vehicles de-
veyance; carriage, ship.” It defines the word signed for running on land. It used the
as “Any receptacle, or means of transport, word "automobile,” a generic term, which
in which something is carried or conveyed, includes all self-propelled motor vehioles
or traoels.” (Italics ours.) that travel on land and are used for the
It will be noted that the Latin word “ve- transportation of passengers, except those
hiculum” means a ship as well as a carriage. designed for running on rails. 42 G. J. p.
609, § 2.
Webster defines the word “vehicle” as
follows: We conclude that the phrase, “any other
sell? propclled vehiele,” includes an airplane,
“(1) That in or on which any person or a motorboat, and any
other like means of
thing is or may be carried, esp. on land, as a conveyance or transpo
rtation which is self-
coach, wagon, car, bicycle, eta; a means of propellcd, and is of the
same general class as
conveyance. an automobile and a motor-cycle.
MOBOYLE v. UNITED STATES 275
da mas) 273
í2, 3] Counsel for McBoyle contend that the to this line of cross-examination was over-
evidence failed to establish that he commit- ruled. Counsel for McBoyle contend that
ted any crime in the Western District of Ok- such ruling was error. It is within the dis~
lahoma, and that therefore the United cretion of the trial court to permit a. witness,
States District Court for that district, be» as to reputation, to be asked upon cross-
cause of the provisions of section 2, art. 3 examination as to particular charges against
of the United States Constitntion, and the Aor reports concerning the person whose rep-
Sixth Amendment to the United States Con~l utation is under investigation. Such evi-
stitution, was without jurisdiction. dence is admissible to test the knowledge
The Motor 'Vehicle Act provides that and credibility of the witness, but not as
“whoever shall transport or cause. to be substantivo evidence against the defendant.
transported in interstate ' ' ' com- White v. State, 111 Ala. 92, 21 So. 330;
merce a motor vehicle, knowing the same to Smith v. State, 103 Ala. 57, 15 So. 866, 871;
have been stolen, shall be punished,” etc., McCrcary v. Commonwealth, 158 Ky. 612,
and that “any person violating this section 165 S. W. 981; People v. Gordan, 103 Cal.
may be punished in any district in or 568, 37 P. 534, 535. We do not think the
through which such motor vehicle has been court abuscd its discretion in the instant
transported or removed by such offender.” ' case.
The crime of transporting a stolen motor` [61 During the course of the cross-exam-
vehicle'in interstate commerce is a continu- ination of McBoyle, he was interrogated by
ing offense. It is committed in each state connsel for the government concerning mat-
and district through which such vehicle is ters that indicated he may have been con-
transported. It was not essential that Mc- nected, either directly or indireetly, with oth-
Boyle should have been physicaily present er offensesfi-a, stolen automobile, another
in the Western District of Oklahoma. The airplane stolen by Lacey, and some transac-
constitutional requirement is that the ac- tions concerning intoxicating quor. These
cused shall be tried in the state or district matters would 'have been immaterial and
where the crime is committed, but not _nec- improper but for the fact. that they were
cssarily in the state and district where the first injected into the case by counsel for
accused was at the time the crime was com~ McBoyle upon the cross-examination of Le.-
mitted. It is sufficicnt if the crime was com~ cey and in the direct examinationof Mc-
mitted in the Western District of Oklahoma Boyle. Having opened up these subjects,
and McBoyle caused it to he committed McBoyle cannot complain because counsel
there. for the government inquired concerning them
Salingcr v. Loisel, 265 U. S. 224, 235, 44 in his cross»examination of McBoyle. State
S. Ct. 519, 68 L. Ed. 989; Burton v. United v. Ritter, 288 Mo. 381, 231 S. W. 606, 608;
States, 202 U. S. 344, 387, 26 S. Ct. 688, 50 Olive v. State, 11 Neb. 1, 7 N. W. 444, 452-,
L. Ed. 1057, 6 Ann. Cas, 362; In re Pal- State v. Mott, 72 Mont. 306, 233 P. 602, 604;
liser, 136 U. S. 257, 265-268, 10 S. Gt. 1034, 40 Cyc. 2496.
34 L. Ed. 514. [7] Counsel for McBoyle contend that the
The jury was warranted in finding, from court erred in admitting, over ohjection,I cop-
the evidence, that McBoyle caused Laeey to ies of the telegrama which passed between
undertake to transport such airplane from McBoyle and Lacey while the latter was at
Ottawa, Ill., to Amarillo, Tex., that Lacey Guymon. McBoyle admitted sending and re-
started from Ottawa and succeeded in flying ceiving the telegrama and a'dmitted the cor-
as far as Guymon, Okl., and that, upon tele- rectness of some of the copies. Laccy identi-
graphic instructions from McBoyle, Lacey fied copies of the telegrams and stated that
stored the airplane at Guymon and returned they were sent and received by him. The tel-
to Galeria; and in concIuding that McBoyle egraph operator at Guymon testified that he
caused the offense to be committed- in the furnished copies of the telegrama to the
Western District of Oklahoma. United States Attorney, and that the origi-
nais had been destroyed. A sufficient foun-
H, 5] At the trial, Mathey, a witness in be-
dation was laid for the admission of the cop-
half of McBoyle, testificd as to the good rep-
ies, and the evidence was material.
utation of the latter, after stating that he
had made an investigation into McBoyle's [8] After the verdict, McBoyie filed a mo-
character. Upon cross-examination, he was tion in arrest of judgment and for a. new
asked whether or not, through such inves- trial. Counsel for McBoyle contend that the
tigfation,` he had learned of specific charges court erred in denving these motions. Mat-
Or reports concerning McBoyle. Objection ters presented by these motions were ad-
276 43 FEDERAL- REPORTER, 2d SERIES