Pinkerton v. United States
- Decided
- October 14, 1946
- Docket
- 719
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 3,200 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that “all members are responsible” in a .conspiracy for the foreseeable acts of a co-conspirator — United States v. Joseph Silvestri (2005)
- ruling that liability for reasonably foreseeable acts within the scope and in furtherance of a conspiracy is attributable to all conspirators — United States v. Ferguson (2011)
- holding that a party to a continuing conspiracy could be found guilty of substantive offenses committed by a co-conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy — United States v. Kenneth Robert Glenn, United States of America v. Manuel J. Benevides (1987)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Justice Douglas delivered the opinion of the Court.
Walter and Daniel Pinkerton are brothers who live a short distance from each other on Daniel’s farm. They were indicted for violations of the Internal Revenue Code. The indictment contained ten substantive counts and one conspiracy count. The jury found Walter guilty on nine of the substantive counts and on the conspiracy count. It found Daniel guilty on six of the substantive counts and on the conspiracy count. Walter was fined $500 and sentenced generally on the substantive counts to imprisonment for thirty months. On the conspiracy count he was given a two year sentence to run concurrently with the other sentence. Daniel was fined $1,000 and sentenced generally on the substantive counts to imprisonment for thirty months. On the conspiracy count he was fined $500 and given a two year sentence to run concurrently with the other sentence. The judgments of conviction were affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals.[1] 151 F. 2d [*642] 499. The case is here on a petition for a writ of certiorari, which we granted because one of the questions presented involved a conflict between the decision below and United States v. Sall, 116 F. 2d 745, decided by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
A single conspiracy was charged and proved. Some of the overt acts charged in the conspiracy count were the same acts charged in the substantive counts. Each of the substantive offenses found was committed pursuant to the conspiracy. Petitioners therefore contend that the substantive counts became merged in the conspiracy count, and that only a single sentence not exceeding the maximum two year penalty provided by the conspiracy statute (Criminal Code § 37, 18 U. S. C. § 88) could be imposed. Or to state the matter differently, they contend that each of the substantive counts became a separate conspiracy count but, since only a single conspiracy was charged and proved, only a single sentence for conspiracy could be imposed. They rely on Braverman v. United States, 317 U. S. 49.
Statutes cited
- 18 U.S.C. § 88
- 26 U.S.C. § 3321
- 18 U.S.C. § 550
Cite this
Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640 (1946)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.