Godwin v. United States, 14177.
| Decision Date | 13 December 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 14177.,14177. |
| Citation | 185 F.2d 411 |
| Parties | GODWIN v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Sherman Albert Godwin, pro se.
R. S. Wilson, U. S. Atty., and Charles A. Beasley, Jr., and David R. Boatright, Asst. U. S. Attys., all of Fort Smith, Ark., for appellee.
Before SANBORN, JOHNSEN, and RIDDICK, Circuit Judges.
The appellant, who will be referred to as defendant, seeks a reversal of a judgment and sentence of imprisonment entered May 10, 1950, upon the verdict of a jury, which found him guilty of having escaped from the jail of Miller County, Arkansas, on or about May 30, 1949.
The defendant was indicted in the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Florida on November 5, 1947, for a violation of the Motor Vehicle Theft Act, Sec. 408, Title 18 U.S.C.A. He was arrested at Marshall, Texas, on May 23, 1949, by a Deputy United States Marshal for the Eastern District of Texas, and was placed in the jail of Miller County, Arkansas. The defendant was brought before a United States Commissioner for that District, at Texarkana, on May 26, 1949. Texarkana straddles the border between Texas and Arkansas. The Commissioner committed the defendant to the custody of the United States Marshal of the District on account of the Florida indictment and the warrant based upon it. The Marshal put the defendant in the jail of Miller County, Arkansas, at Texarkana, the use of which for the confinement of federal prisoners had been authorized by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons of the United States Department of Justice. The jail was an approved jail for federal prisoners. The Sheriff of Miller County, custodian of the jail, had a contract with the Bureau of Prisons for the care and maintenance of federal prisoners. The Sheriff's custody of the defendant on and after May 26, 1949, was based on the commitment issued by the United States Commissioner.
The defendant broke out of, and escaped from, the jail in the night of May 29, 1949. On January 9, 1950, he was indicted under Sec. 751, Title 18, U.S.C.A. The indictment charged that "On or about May 30, 1949, in the Western District of Arkansas, Sherman Albert Godwin did escape from the Miller County, Arkansas, jail where he was in custody under and by virtue of process issued under the laws of the United States by a United States Commissioner in and for the Eastern District of Texas after his arrest on a charge of felony."
The defendant was apprehended by a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation at Baytown, Texas, on June 11, 1949, and turned over to the United States Marshal. The defendant entered a plea of not guilty to the indictment charging him with having escaped. The court appointed counsel to defend him. The trial took place on May 8, 1950. The evidence was virtually undisputed. It appeared that the Florida indictment had been dismissed on December 28, 1949, which was approximately six months after the defendant's escape. The defendant moved for a verdict of acquittal upon the ground that his removal by the United States Marshal from the Eastern District of Texas to the Western District of Arkansas was illegal and that his confinement in the Miller County jail was not based upon a lawful commitment to that institution. The District Court reserved a ruling on the motion, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lott v. United States, 238
...Cir., 249 F.2d 156. And see O'Neal v. United States, 5 Cir., 264 F.2d 809; Drown v. United States, 9 Cir., 198 F.2d 999; Godwin v. United States, 8 Cir., 185 F.2d 411. To the contrary are Lujan v. United States, 10 Cir., 204 F.2d 171; Smith v. United States, 10 Cir., 273 F.2d 462; and see S......
-
Smith v. United States
...198 F.2d 999, certiorari denied, 344 U.S. 920, 73 S.Ct. 385, 97 L.Ed. 709; Pugh v. United States, 9 Cir., 197 F.2d 509; Godwin v. United States, 8 Cir., 185 F.2d 411. 2 Bryan v. United States, 338 U.S. 552, 70 S.Ct. 317, 94 L.Ed. 335, considered Section 2106 in connection with the right of ......
-
United States v. Bruno, Crim. A. No. 23138-3.
...by virtue of process issued under the laws of the United States within the meaning of Sec. 751, Title 18, U.S.C.A." Godwin v. United States (C.A.8) 185 F.2d 411, 413. See also Derengowski v. United States (C.A.8) 404 F.2d 778, and cases therein cited; Laws v. United States (C.A.10) 386 F.2d......
-
Dickey v. United States
...1050; Lott v. United States, 5 Cir., 280 F.2d 24, rev'd on other grounds, 367 U.S. 421, 81 S.Ct. 1563, 6 L.Ed.2d 940; Godwin v. United States, 8 Cir., 185 F.2d 411. 3 Nevertheless the Supreme Court, 367 U.S. at page 425, 81 S.Ct. at page 1563, characterized the variance between the rules as......