Tidmore v. Taylor, 7362.

Decision Date23 September 1963
Docket NumberNo. 7362.,7362.
Citation323 F.2d 88
PartiesDavid Homer TIDMORE, Appellant, v. J. C. TAYLOR, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

Dale R. Harris, Denver, Colo., for appellant.

Benjamin E. Franklin, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Newell A. George, U. S. Atty., with him on the brief), for appellee.

Before PHILLIPS, HILL and SETH, Circuit Judges.

PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge.

An information containing three counts was filed against Tidmore in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. The first count charged that Tidmore on May 31, 1956, in the District of Kansas, did steal, abstract and carry away a letter from an authorized depository for mail, which letter contained a United States Treasury check in the amount of $117.10, payable to Alice Wofford. The second count charged that on the same date, and in the District of Kansas, Tidmore forged the endorsement of the payee, Alice Wofford, on said check for the purpose of obtaining from the United States $117.10, and the third count charged that Tidmore on the same date, and in the District of Kansas, with intent to defraud the United States, uttered and published as true such check, with the forged endorsement thereon. The case was transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.1 Thereafter, in the latter court, Tidmore entered a plea of guilty to each of the several counts of the information and on October 24, 1956, was sentenced to the custody of the Attorney General for three years on Count I, and the imposition of sentence on Counts II and III was suspended and he was placed on probation for such counts for a period of five years, to begin at the expiration of the sentence on Count I.

On January 30, 1959, Tidmore was conditionally released from confinement on the sentence imposed on Count I. On May 8, 1959, a conditional release violator's warrant was issued by the United States Board of Parole on the ground that Tidmore had failed to report to his probation officer. Tidmore was convicted in Arizona of a state penal offense and on August 5, 1959, was sentenced to the Arizona State Penitentiary for a period of 18 months. In June, 1960, the conditional release violator's warrant was executed and Tidmore was returned to the United States Penitentiary to serve the balance of the three-year sentence.

On December 19, 1960, Tidmore again was released from the United States Penitentiary, having served the remainder of his three-year federal sentence. Tidmore again went to the State of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Blair v. People of State of California, 18949.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 24 Febrero 1965
    ...frivolous only if the applicant can make no rational argument on the law or facts in support of his claim for relief. See Tidmore v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 323 F.2d 88, 90; Ragan v. Cox, 10 Cir., 305 F.2d 58, 60. In our view, Blair's application for a writ of habeas corpus is not frivolous in thi......
  • Phillips v. Carey
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 6 Enero 1981
    ...v. United States, 400 F.2d 879 (10th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 932, 89 S.Ct. 1204, 22 L.Ed.2d 462 (1969); Tidmore v. Taylor, 323 F.2d 88 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 954, 84 S.Ct. 973, 11 L.Ed.2d 973 (1964). This test must be followed. We expressly so held in Collins v.......
  • Wartman v. Branch 7, Civil Division, County Court, Milwaukee County, State of Wis., 73--2117
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • 6 Febrero 1975
    ...also has two cases on the subject that conflict. Compare Oughton v. United States, 310 F.2d 803 (10th Cir. 1962) with Tidmore v. Taylor, 323 F.2d 88 (10th Cir. 1963).8 See Firnhaber v. Sensenbrenner, 385 F.Supp. 406 (E.D.Wis.1974).9 This opinion has been circulated among all judges of this ......
  • Durham v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 4 Noviembre 1968
    ...43 F.R.D. 343, 346 (September 18, 1967). We concur with these standards insofar as they are consonant with the holding in Tidmore v. Taylor, 323 F.2d 88 (10th Cir.1963)1 and Ragan v. Cox, 305 F.2d 58 (10th Cir.1962). After reviewing the record, the trial court found the forma pauperis motio......
  • 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