Griffin v. United States, 10815.
| Citation | 173 F.2d 909 |
| Decision Date | 17 June 1949 |
| Docket Number | No. 10815.,10815. |
| Parties | GRIFFIN v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Harry A. Abrams, of Cincinnati, Ohio, Harry A. Abrams, of Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief, for appellant.
Robert E. Marshall, of Cincinnati, Ohio, (Ray J. O'Donnell, of Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for appellee.
Before HICKS, Chief Judge, and SIMONS and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
Upon an appeal from the denial of a motion to correct sentence, the following facts appear. The appellant, upon his release after serving a sentence in the Kentucky State Reformatory at LaGrange, Kentucky, was issued a Selective Service Registration Certificate by the local board at LaGrange. He was then taken to Lexington, Kentucky, to face charges in the Eastern District of Kentucky for violation of the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 408 now §§ 2311-2313, and upon his plea of guilty was sentenced to serve two years imprisonment. On the next day, April 19, 1944, he was committed to the United States Penitentiary at Terre Haute, Indiana, to begin the service of that sentence. On August 11 of the same year he escaped, but on August 28 he was arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, for failure to possess a Selective Service Registration Certificate and was indicted and sentenced to a term of two years in the penitentiary, the sentence to begin at the expiration of the two year sentence he was serving at the time of his escape. On October 23, 1944, he was indicted by the grand jury in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, and sentenced to a term of five years in the federal penitentiary for violation of the Federal Escape Act, Title 18 U.S.C.A. § 473h now § 751, the sentence to commence on the expiration of the two two-year sentences imposed upon him by the Federal Court at Cincinnati. He has now served both two-year sentences and has entered upon the five-year term which was to follow their expiration.
In his motion to correct sentence he challenges the imposition of the two-year term for failure to possess a registration certificate, on the ground that the indictment in that case failed to state an offense under the statute, § 311, Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix. This section creates an offense where one knowingly fails to carry out any of the provisions of the Act. The indictment in that case did not use the word "knowingly" and the appellant here alleges, without contradiction, that his registration certificate was taken from him while incarcerated in Terre Haute. In our view, the law is that where the statute creating the offense requires that it must be knowingly committed, mere failure to comply is not enough. United States v. Trypuc, 2 Cir., 136 F.2d 900; United States v. Hoffman, 2 Cir., 137 F.2d 416; Mackey...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Gernie
...may persist." United States v. Morgan, supra, 346 U.S. at 512, 74 S.Ct. at 253, 98 L.Ed. 248. See also Griffen v. United States, 173 F.2d 909 (6 Cir. 1949) (per curiam). In the case at bar it cannot be said that the results of the conviction of the petitioner may not still persist or, that ......
-
Duggins v. United States, 12908.
...construction given to Sec. 2255 by the foregoing cases. We recognize an apparently conflicting ruling of this Court in Griffin v. United States, 6 Cir., 173 F.2d 909, rehearing denied, 6 Cir., 175 F.2d 192. That case involved a motion to correct a sentence which had been served, although th......
-
United States v. Bradford
...F.2d 909; Rowland v. Arkansas, 8 Cir., 179 F.2d 709. 5 United States v. Hayman, 342 U.S. 205, 72 S.Ct. 263. 6 9 Cir., 186 F.2d 704. 7 6 Cir., 173 F.2d 909; on rehearing, 6 Cir., 175 F.2d 8 Hammers v. United States, 5 Cir., 279 F. 265; De Benque v. United States, D. C.Cir., 85 F.2d 202, 207;......
-
United States v. Smith
...possess a registration certificate is not made a criminal offense. The failure to comply must be knowingly committed. Griffin v. United States, 173 F.2d 909 (6th Cir. 1949); United States v. Valenti, 74 F. Supp. 718 Count II of the indictment herein fails to state all of the elements of the......