435 F.2d 972 (10th Cir. 1970), 106-70, United States v. Fairchild
|Docket Nº:||106-70, 107-70.|
|Citation:||435 F.2d 972|
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony William FAIRCHILD, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William E. LAMBERT, Defendant-Appellant.|
|Case Date:||December 29, 1970|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit|
Rehearings Denied Jan. 25, 1971.
John E. Green, Asst. U.S. Atty., (William R. Burkett, U.S. Atty., on the brief), for plaintiff-appellee.
Judd L. Black, Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendant-appellant Anthony William Fairchild.
Norman A. Smith, Oklahoma City, Okl. (Richard A. Procter, Oklahoma City, Okl., on the brief), for defendant-appellant William E. Lambert.
Before LEWIS, Chief Judge, McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judge, and BRATTON, District Judge.
McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judge.
Fairchild and Lambert were jointly charged in a three count indictment with the unlawful receipt and possession of stolen mail matter and conspiracy. More specifically, in Count 1 of the indictment Fairchild and Lambert were charged with unlawfully receiving, concealing and having in their possession on or about May 26, 1969, the contents of a certain bag for mail which had theretofore been stolen, such contents being 1800 shares of Standard Oil Company of Indiana common stock and 7 described U.S. Smelting, Mining and Refining debenture bonds, knowing that such stocks and bonds had been stolen, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 1708. Included in Count 1 was the allegation that Fairchild and Lambert each aided and abetted the other in his receipt and possession of the described stocks and bonds. By Count 2 Fairchild and Lambert were similarly charged with unlawfully receiving and possessing on or about June 5, 1969, certain other described stocks which had been stolen from a mail receptacle or authorized depository for mail, and which they knew had been so stolen. Count 3 charged the two defendants during the period of time from May 12, 1969, to June 5, 1969, with conspiring to commit certain described criminal offenses against the United States.
Fairchild was convicted by a jury on all three counts and the sentences thereafter imposed are to be served concurrently. Lambert was acquitted on Count 1, but convicted on Counts 2 and 3 and the sentences imposed on him are also to be served concurrently.
Fairchild contends that because of some fifteen alleged errors on the part of the trial court he was deprived of a fair and impartial trial and that his conviction should therefor be set aside in the interest of doing justice. Lambert argues that the trial court erred in some six different particulars, four of which are included in Fairchild's list of alleged errors. Many of the matters urged upon us were not in any way, shape or form presented to the trial court. Ordinarily matters not urged to the trial court will not be considered by us on appeal. Fed.R.Crim.P. 51. Troutman v. United States, 100 F.2d 628 (10th...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP