United States v. Kreuter
Decision Date | 05 March 1954 |
Docket Number | Cr. No. 56759. |
Citation | 119 F. Supp. 227 |
Parties | UNITED STATES v. KREUTER. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas |
Charles F. Herring, U. S. Atty., Austin, Tex., Holvey Williams, Asst. U. S. Atty., El Paso, Tex., for plaintiff.
Joseph A. Calamia, El Paso, Tex., for defendant.
This case was tried before me without a jury on February 24, 1954, at which time I announced a verdict of guilty on all counts. On the 5th day of March, 1954, subject was sentenced to five years on each of the first six counts, all sentences to run concurrently. The seventh count was at that time dismissed on motion of the United States Attorney, as the record conclusively shows that the defendant had been arrested before the mails were used as alleged in said count.
The indictment in this case is in seven counts, each of which purports to charge a violation of the mail fraud statute, to wit, Section 1341, Title 18, United States Code. Some of the counts are based on mailing of letters in El Paso, Texas, and others are based on receiving of letters in El Paso, as will more specifically appear. The first count of the indictment is as follows:
The fourth count is identical with the first, except for the time of mailing and the contents of the letter. The mailing charge of the second count is as follows:
The third, fifth and sixth counts are identical with the second count, except that some of these counts describe the contents of the letter. In my opinion, each of the letters had to do with the scheme to defraud and, as I understand it, from motions filed and argument of counsel, the sole, or at least main defense, is that the evidence shows a series of schemes to defraud, and that each had reached its fruition before the mails were used for that respective scheme. It is therefore contended that the mails were not employed in furtherance of the respective schemes to defraud. In my opinion, however, the evidence clearly shows a continuing scheme as alleged in the indictment, and I so find. This is a question of fact for my determination. United States v. Kuiken, D.C., 101 F.Supp. 929, which opinion by this Court was, in effect, adopted by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, 196 F.2d 223, certiorari denied 344 U.S. 867-910, 73 S.Ct. 109, 97 L.Ed. 657.
Defendant did not testify, nor did he offer any evidence. The Government's evidence, in brief, was as follows:
On October 28, 1953, defendant opened an account in the El Paso National Bank, El Paso, Texas, by depositing a check in the amount of $1,500, drawn on the First National Bank of Denver, Denver, Colorado. Defendant gave as his employer, R. E. McKee Construction Company of El Paso, Texas, which is a local construction company with a nationwide scope and reputation. He also gave a local address which was listed in the telephone book under a name very similar to his. This same, or very similar, information was given at the opening of each of the other bank accounts, as will later appear, and was shown to be entirely false on each occasion. The $1,500 check mentioned above was mailed by the El Paso...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Pihakis
...denied 344 U.S. 867, 73 S.Ct. 109, 97 L. Ed. 657, rehearing denied 344 U.S. 910, 73 S.Ct. 329, 97 L.Ed. 702; United States v. Kreuter, D.C., 119 F.Supp. 227, at page 231; Bauman v. United States, supra, 156 F.2d at pages 537, 538. As to the scheme involved, see United States v. Citrin, supr......
- United States v. Scully
-
Kreuter v. United States, 15000.
...was before the Court, the sentence being five years on each count, concurrent. We approve generally the able trial judge's opinion, 119 F.Supp. 227. On this appeal, appellant's attorney attacks each conclusion of law by the trial court; and appellant personally has filed a handwritten brief......
-
Kreuter v. Looney, 5432.
...we cannot agree. Aside from the fact that substantially the same points now urged were in issue in the original trial, United States v. Kreuter, D.C., 119 F.Supp. 227, and on appeal to the Circuit Court, 5 Cir., 218 F.2d 532, as well as in the Section 2255 proceeding, and were considered an......