Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

United States v. Pugh

• 1878 • 99 U.S. 265 • Waite Court
United States v. Pugh was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a defendant could be convicted of a crime if the indictment failed to allege the essential elements of the offense. The defendant, Pugh, was indicted for the crime of receiving stolen goods, but the indictment failed to allege that the goods were stolen. The Supreme Court held that the indictment was insufficient and that Pugh could not be convicted of the crime. The Court reasoned that an...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1878
Docket: 227
99 U.S. 265
25 L. Ed. 322
1878 U.S. LEXIS 1539

United States v. Pugh

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

United States v. Pugh was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a defendant could be convicted of a crime if the indictment failed to allege the essential elements of the offense. The defendant, Pugh, was indicted for the crime of receiving stolen goods, but the indictment failed to allege that the goods were stolen. The Supreme Court held that the indictment was insufficient and that Pugh could not be convicted of the crime. The Court reasoned that an indictment must contain all the essential elements of the offense in order to be valid. The Court noted that the indictment in this case failed to allege that the goods were stolen, which was an essential element of the crime. Therefore, the Court held that the indictment was insufficient and that Pugh could not be convicted of the crime. The Court's decision in this case established the principle that an indictment must contain all the essential elements of the offense in order to be valid. This principle has been applied in numerous cases since then, and it is an important part of criminal law in the United States.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In United States v. Pugh, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a federal statute that allowed for the forfeiture of goods imported in violation of law applied to goods seized by customs officers before they were released from custody and delivered to their owner. The majority opinion held that the statute did apply, but Justice Field dissented on two grounds: first, he argued that Congress had not intended for such forfeitures; second, he argued that if it had been so intended then it would be unconstitutional as an ex post facto law. He reasoned that since no crime or offense had occurred prior to seizure and delivery of the goods there could be no forfeiture under this particular statute because it only applied when a person has committed some act which is punishable by forfeiture after conviction. Therefore, Justice Field concluded that allowing such forfeitures would constitute an ex post facto punishment prohibited by both state and federal constitutions.

Opinion written by Justice MRWaite
Decided: Mar 03, 1879
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms