Miscellaneous Documents

Displaying 289 - 300 of 874

U.S. vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, et al.: Order for the Dismissal of Cases

Order for the Dismissal of Criminal Case No. 6470: United States vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, Isaac E. Martin, Harvey Storms, Manning Wilcox, defendants. The document, signed by District Judge Albert L. Reeves, also orders dismissed eighteen additional cases involving the same defendants, all Federal Prohibition Agents. Eight more cases involving other defendants were also dismissed by this order.

U.S. vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, et al.: Joseph Lusco Direct Examination Transcript

Transcript of examination of Joseph Lusco before the Grand Jury in Criminal Case No. 6469: United States vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, Isaac E. Martin, Benno Grauenbaum, Harvey Storms, Manning Wilcox, defendants. The transcript examination of Joseph Lusco regarding his experience with Agents Wilcox and Curran. Lusco had a pending Prohibition violation case, and had previously been convicted of other Prohibition violations. When Lusco was asked where he kept his liquor, he replied "That is for you to find out."

U.S. vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, et al.: Indictment

Indictment for Criminal Case No. 6470: United States vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, Isaac E. Martin, Harvey Storms, Manning Wilcox, defendants. The defendants were serving as Federal Prohibition Agents in Kansas City, Missouri, and are all charged with conspiring to conduct raids on individuals suspected of violating the Prohibition Act and then extort those individuals for cash payments to avoid arrest and receive protection from future interference in their distillation, possession, or sale of alcohol.

U.S. vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, et al.: Indictment

Indictment for Criminal Case No. 6469: United States vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, Isaac E. Martin, Benno Grauenbaum, Harvey Storms, Manning Wilcox, defendants. The defendants were all Federal Prohibition Agents in Kansas City, Missouri, and are all charged "in the unlawful manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors or in the unlawful possession thereof." They are also charged with dividing the city into "different raiding territories," then using their positions to extort money from the subjects of their investigations and raids.

U.S. vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, et al.: Commitments

Commitments in Criminal Case No. 6469: United States vs. Elton Apt, Arthur L. Curran, Ray Kirk, Isaac E. Martin, Benno Grauenbaum, Harvey Storms, Manning Wilcox, defendants. Manning Wilcox, Harvey Storms, Arthur L. Curran, and Elton Apt were found guilty of violating Section 37 of the Penal Code and sentenced to two years in the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth and assessed fines of 2,000, plus costs, per person.

U.S. vs. Elton Apt and Arthur L. Curran: Indictment

Indictment for Criminal Case No. 6471: United States vs. Elton Apt and Arthur L. Curran, defendants. The defendants were serving as Federal Prohibition Agents in Kansas City, Missouri, and are charged with conspiring to conduct raids on individuals suspected of violating the Prohibition Act and then extort those individuals for cash payments to avoid arrest and receive protection from future interference in their distillation, possession, or sale of alcohol.

U.S. vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, et al.: Memorandum Opinion and Orders

Memorandum opinion and orders dealing with demurrers and motions to squash, pleas in abatement and motions to strike such pleas in abatement in Criminal Cases Nos. 13646, 13648, and 13650. Due to the similarities of the cases, only No. 13646 is addressed in detail. The demurrers and motions to squash argue about what and how voters' rights are violated when counts are switched from the intended candidate to another vs.

U.S. vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, et al.: Memorandum

Memorandum from District Judge Merrill E. Otis ruling on affidavits of prejudice filed by defendants in Criminal Case No. 13646, and also addresses case numbers 13648, 13676, 13678, 13682, and 13684. Otis writes that he believes there is "no merit whatever in these affidavits" and rejects he has any prejudice in these cases.

U.S. vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, et al.: Judgment and Commitment

Judgments and commitment in Criminal Case No. 13754: United States vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, Louise Davis, Ruth Tucker, Frances M. Eaton, Ernest Williams, Herman Supofsky, Elva O'Byrne, and Frances B. Ryan, defendants. The documents report that Buck and Tucker were found guilty of the second count, the first having been entered nolle prosequi, and were sentenced to one month in jail and a fine of $100.

U.S. vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, et al.: Indictment

Indictment in Criminal Case No. 13754: United States vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, Louise Davis, Ruth Tucker, Frances M. Eaton, Ernest Williams, Herman Supofsky, Elva O'Byrne, and Frances B. Ryan, defendants. The defendants were charged with conspiring to impede citizens' right to vote and have that vote truthfully counted in the 15th Precinct of the 12th Ward during the November 3, 1936 election.

U.S. vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, et al.: Indictment

Indictment in Criminal Case No. 13646: United States vs. Ellis Buck, Sam Brenner, Viola Doss, Louise Davis, Ruth Tucker, and Frances M. Eaton, defendants. The defendants were charged with conspiring to impede citizens' right to vote and have that vote truthfully counted in the 15th Precinct of the 12th Ward during the November 3, 1936 election.

U.S. vs. Edson M. Walker, Loretta McEntee, Chloe G. Albright, et al.: Verdict

Verdict in the trial of Criminal Case No. 13648: United States vs. Edson M. Walker, Loretta McEntee, Chloe G. Albright, Elijah Burke, Anna V. O'Laughlin, Tessie Mears, and John L. Drummond, defendants. Walker and Drummond were found guilty in the second count of the indictment. McEntee, Burke, and O'Laughlin received no verdict.