United States v. Magness, 71-1709.

Decision Date16 February 1972
Docket NumberNo. 71-1709.,71-1709.
Citation456 F.2d 976
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Leslie Vaughn MAGNESS, Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Robert M. Talcott (argued), Sherman Oaks, Cal., for appellant.

David H. Fox, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., David R. Nissen, Chief, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

Before HAMLEY, HUFSTEDLER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Leslie V. Magness appeals from his conviction, after trial without a jury, of concealing1 Wayland Jean Ballard in order to prevent his apprehension, knowing that a warrant had been issued for Ballard's arrest, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1071. The ultimate question presented on appeal is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the finding of guilt. We reverse.

The testimony favorable to the Government is as follows: On December 19, 1970, Magness went to the Cress Motel in the small town of Cabazon, California, and rented Room 7, telling the operator that the room was for some people from out of the state. Magness paid fifteen dollars for a week's rent. On December 22, 1970, a federal warrant for the arrest of Ballard, on a charge of unlawful flight to avoid prosecution for murder, was issued.

About December 26, 1970, Ballard, using the name Wilkins, registered at the Cress Motel as one of the persons for whom Magness had rented Room 7. Magness visited Room 7 several times while Ballard was there. Magness and Ballard were also seen together around town, although Ballard was always introduced as Wilkins. There is, however, no evidence to establish that no one in Cabazon, other than Magness, knew of Ballard's presence; and, in fact, Ballard's girl friend was also in the town during this period.

On January 4, 1971, Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent J. Clayton Taylor arrived in Cabazon to investigate whether Ballard was there in hiding. Taylor was accompanied throughout this investigation by several other special agents and law enforcement officers. On January 4, 1971, Taylor spoke to only one person other than defendant about Ballard. That person was a service station attendant who reported that he did not know a Mr. Ballard.

Later on the same day, Taylor spoke to Magness at the latter's home and at that time told Magness about the outstanding federal warrant. Taylor also warned Magness about the federal harboring and concealment statute. When Taylor asked Magness if the latter had been in contact with Ballard, Magness replied that he had known Ballard about twenty years ago in Texas, but had not seen Ballard for many years.

Following this conversation, Taylor and the others with him left Magness' home and proceeded with the investigation elsewhere. Approximately one hour later, Taylor returned to Magness' home and had a second conversation with him. Taylor told Magness that he had new information linking Magness with Ballard. Magness then admitted that he had been in contact with Ballard, and stated that Ballard was at the Oasis Motel, living under the name of Wilkins.

Taylor and the other officers then proceeded to the Oasis Motel but ascertained that Ballard had been living in Room 7 of the adjacent Cress Motel. Upon their arrival at Room...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • U.S. v. Silva
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • October 1, 1984
    ...officers regarding contact with the fugitive have also been found to lie without the scope of the statute. United States v. Magness, 456 F.2d 976, 978 (9th Cir.1972). What is generally required to make out a violation of the statute is "any physical act of providing assistance, including fo......
  • Thompson v. Anderson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • December 27, 1977
    ...a fugitive from justice and which has been held not to cover false statements regarding the fugitive's whereabouts, United States v. Magness, 456 F.2d 976 (9th Cir. 1972); United States v. Foy, 416 F.2d 940 (7th Cir. 14 See, with respect to possible constitutional and other problems existin......
  • U.S. v. Prescott
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • September 14, 1978
    ...U.S.C. § 3. She relies on Miller v. United States, supra, and on United States v. Foy, 7 Cir., 1969, 416 F.2d 940, and United States v. Magness, 9 Cir., 1972, 456 F.2d 976. Those cases do stand for the proposition that such a lie is not itself a violation of § 3. It does not follow, however......
  • United States v. Annamalai
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • September 24, 2019
    ...("Failure to disclose a fugitive’s location and giving financial assistance do not constitute harboring[.]"); United States v. Magness , 456 F.2d 976, 978 (9th Cir. 1972) ("[A] false statement, standing alone, ... could not constitute the active conduct of hiding or secreting contemplated b......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT