McBoyle v. United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| McBoyle v. United States | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
||||||||||||
| Argued February 26 – 27, 1931 Decided March 9, 1931 |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| Holding | ||||||||||||
| The court held that since the law did not specify aircraft, it did not apply to aircraft. | ||||||||||||
| Court membership | ||||||||||||
| Chief Justice: Charles Evans Hughes Associate Justices: Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Willis Van Devanter, James Clark McReynolds, Louis Brandeis, George Sutherland, Pierce Butler, Harlan Fiske Stone, Owen Josephus Roberts |
||||||||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||||||||
| Majority by: Holmes Joined by: unanimous |
||||||||||||
| Laws applied | ||||||||||||
| U.S. Const. | ||||||||||||
McBoyle v. United States, 283 U.S. 25 (1931), was a United States Supreme Court case.
Contents |
[edit] Background
McBoyle transported a plane that he knew to be stolen from Ottawa, Illinois to Guymon, Oklahoma.
[edit] Case
McBoyle was accused of violating the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act[1]. The petitioners claimed that since the act did not specifically mention aircraft, it did not apply to aircraft.
[edit] Decision
The court held that, since other acts - such as the Tarriff Act of 1930[2] - specifically excluded aircraft in its definition of a vehicle, the law must be interpreted narrowly. Justice Holmes stated:
Although it is not likely that a criminal will carefully consider the text of the law before he murders or steals, it is reasonable that a fair warning should be given to the world in language that the common world will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed. To make the warning fair, so far as possible the line should be clear.
This case is a good example of the canon of ejusdem generis ("of the same kind, class, or nature").
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- Full text from Buffalo Center for Law
