Sorrells v. United States

287 U.S. 435 (1932)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Martin, a prohibition agent, testified that having resided for a time in Haywood County he posed as a tourist when he visited D's home. Accompanied by three residents of the county who knew D well. He was introduced as a resident of Charlotte who was stopping for a time at Clyde. D was a veteran of the World War and a former member of the 30th Division A. E. F. Witness informed D that he was also an ex-service man and a former member of the same Division, which was true. Witness asked D if he could get some liquor and D stated that he did not have any. Later, there was a second request without a result. After the witness asked D for a third time to get him some liquor, D left his home and after a few minutes came back with a half-gallon of liquor for which the witness paid D five dollars. Martin also testified that he was 'the first and only person among those present at the time who said anything about securing some liquor,' and that his purpose was to prosecute D for procuring and selling it. The Government rested its case on Martin's testimony. Other witnesses testified that while the agent and his companions were at Dt's home 'for probably an hour or an hour and a half the agent asked D three or four or probably five times to get him, the agent, some liquor.' D never brought up the liquor business on his own. P called three witnesses who testified that D had the general reputation of a rum-runner. There was no evidence that D had ever possessed or sold any intoxicating liquor prior to the transaction in question. The court refused to instruct on entrapment. D was convicted and it was affirmed on appeal. D appealed.