Bowen v. United States, 3852.
| Decision Date | 23 April 1949 |
| Docket Number | No. 3852.,3852. |
| Citation | 174 F.2d 323 |
| Parties | BOWEN v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
Charles F. Cory, of Denver, Colo., filed a brief for appellant.
Robert E. Shelton, U. S. Atty. and Haskell B. Pugh, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Oklahoma City, filed a brief for appellee.
Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, and BRATTON AND MURRAH, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate a sentence.
On or about April 12, 1946, Bowen was sentenced by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to three years in the custody of the Attorney General of the United States for theft on a government reservation. At and prior to the imposition of that sentence, Bowen was represented by counsel. His counsel advised the court that Bowen had received a medical discharge from the Army. An investigation was made and it was determined that he needed psychiatric treatment. The California court, at the time of imposing sentence, made a recommendation that Bowen be confined in the Medical Center at Springfield, Missouri.
On October 28, 1946, an indictment was returned in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma charging that Bowen, on October 9, 1946, having been sentenced to three years in the custody of the Attorney General, and having been received at the Federal Reformatory at El Reno, Oklahoma, and being in the lawful custody of the officers of such Federal Reformatory, did unlawfully attempt to escape and flee from the custody of such officers in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 753h now § 751. The court appointed Mr. Herbert K. Hyde, an attorney of Oklahoma City, to represent Bowen. On December 10, 1946, Bowen was brought before the court for arraignment. Hyde was not present because of his absence from Oklahoma City. Bowen advised the court that he was desirous of waiving the appointment of further counsel and entering a plea. He signed a written waiver in which he stated that the court had duly explained to him his constitutional rights, including the right to counsel; that he waived the right to counsel; and that he entered a plea of guilty to the indictment. The court imposed a sentence of one year and a day in a Federal institution to be designated by the Attorney General, to run concurrently with the sentence Bowen was then serving.
Thereafter, on January 6, 1947, Hyde appeared and presented an application of Bowen for modification of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hash v. Henderson
...1966); Bateman v. United States, 277 F.2d 65 (8th Cir. 1960); Montos v. United States, 261 F.2d 39 (7th Cir. 1958); Bowen v. United States, 174 F.2d 323 (10th Cir. 1949); Cook v. United States, 171 F.2d 567 (1st Cir. 1948), cert. denied, 336 U.S. 926, 69 S.Ct. 647, 93 L.Ed. 1088 The fact th......
-
Bateman v. United States
...of the place of confinement is no part of a judicial sentence; Aderhold v. Edwards, 5 Cir., 1934, 71 F.2d 297, 298; Bowen v. United States, 10 Cir., 1949, 174 F.2d 323, 324; and is nothing more than surplusage. Bugg v. United States, 8 Cir., 1944, 140 F.2d 848, 851-852." 261 F.2d at page Un......
-
United States v. Tomaiolo
...1966); Bateman v. United States, 277 F.2d 65 (8th Cir. 1960); Montos v. United States, 261 F.2d 39 (7th Cir. 1958); Bowen v. United States, 174 F.2d 323 (10th Cir. 1949); Cook v. United States, 171 F.2d 567 (1st Cir. 1948) cert. denied 336 U.S. 926, 69 S.Ct. 647, 93 L.Ed. 1088 The commencem......
-
Joslin v. Moseley
...or his authorized representative. The Federal Court had no power to commit the petitioner to the State Penitentiary." In Bowen v. United States, 174 F.2d 323 (10th Cir.), it was held as between two federal judgments that "* * * the place of confinement was no part of the sentence, but was a......