Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435 (decided December 19, 1932): defendant accused of liquor sale (during Prohibition) can assert entrapment defense (agent who served in same division during World War I visited with some mutual friends and drew him into a long chat about their wartime experiences, casually asked for liquor, and after third request defendant left and returned twenty minutes later with a bottle and agent paid him $5 — aha!! you’re under arrest!)
Hunt v. Springfield Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 196 U.S. 47 (decided December 19, 1904): claim on insurance policy (for loss of household furniture) properly denied because furniture subject to “deed of trust” which is the same as a “chattel mortgage” and therefore excluded under policy language (this is an example of the “federal common law” the Court used to render before Erie R.R. v. Tompkins; state supreme courts were only too happy to go along as the Court decided issues of state law for them)
Reina v. United States, 364 U.S. 507 (decided December 19, 1960): affirming contempt order; witness had refused to testify after having been granted immunity under federal narcotics law statute but claimed Fifth Amendment privilege citing danger of state prosecution; Court holds that immunity also extends to state proceedings and does not encroach on state police powers in violation of Tenth Amendment (Court notes that statute, 18 U.S.C. §1406, had language similar to other federal immunity statutes, so I suppose this holding is broadly applicable)
コメント