Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2d 264
Philip M. Jones, Lewis, Jones & Ellwood, Denver, Colo., for appellant.
Stephen M. Duncan, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty. (James L. Treece, U.S. Atty.,
with him on the brief), for appellee.
Before HILL, BARNES1 and SETH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Ronald Lee Illingworth appeals from a jury verdict finding him guilty of having
violated the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 842(a)(3), by unlawfully transporting
explosives across state lines without a permit required by law. Illingworth
appears to have taken an airplane flight from Pocatello, Idaho, to Salt Lake
City, Utah, and then taken another flight from Salt Lake City to Denver,
Colorado, while carrying a handbag containing dynamite. His expressed reason
for this enterprise was to help his father blow up some tree stumps at the latter's
farm in Iowa. He disclosed the contents of the bag to ticket agents at the
Denver airport.
18 U.S.C. 842 under which the prosecution was commenced is part of Chapter
40 of that title of the United States Code; so, too, is section 845 of Title 18,
which provides that:
'(a) Except in the case of subsections . . . of section 844 of this title, this chapter
shall not apply to:
'(1) any aspect of the transportation of explosive materials via . . . air which are
'(1) any aspect of the transportation of explosive materials via . . . air which are
regulated by the United States Department of Transportation and agencies
thereof; . . ..'
Thus the question arises whether appellant could be prosecuted under section
842 in the face of the above exception to its application. The exception refers to
materials which are regulated by the Department, and not necessarily
prohibited.
'Any person who knowingly . . . causes the transportation in air commerce, of,
any shipment, baggage, or property, the transportation of which would be
prohibited by any rule, regulation, or requirement prescribed by the
Administrator under subchapter VI of this chapter, relating to the transportation
. . . of explosives or other dangerous articles shall, upon conviction thereof for
each such offense, be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000, or to
imprisonment not exceeding one year, or to both such fine and imprisonment; . .
..'
10
11
The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded with directions to dismiss
the indictment. This action constitutes no bar to a proper indictment.