Bronston v. United States Case Brief

Facts of the Case

During a bankruptcy hearing, petitioner, who was the sole owner of a company that produced motion pictures in various European locations between 1958 and 1964, was asked whether he had ever held any personal accounts in Swiss banks. Petitioner replied under oath with an unresponsive and arguably misleading answer that the company of which he was an officer had held an account there. The petitioner was thereafter indicted for perjury and convicted by a jury in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, which the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the conviction on the ground that, under the federal perjury statute, the petitioner had committed perjury by giving an answer containing half a truth but which also constituted a lie by implication, the answer having been given intentionally in place of the responsive answer called for by the question he had been asked. Petitioner appealed.

Question

“Do officers have probable cause to arrest for unlawful entry under D.C. law despite a claim of good-faith entry?Was the law sufficiently clearly established to justify the denial of immunity to the officers?”

CONCLUSION

0

Case Information

Citation: 409 US 352 (1973)
Argued: Nov 15, 1972
Decided: Jan 10, 1973
Case Brief: 1973