United States v. Mensik, 14907.
Decision Date | 23 April 1971 |
Docket Number | No. 14907.,14907. |
Citation | 440 F.2d 1232 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. C. Oran MENSIK, Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
C. Oran Mensik, pro se.
Brian P. Gettings, U. S. Atty., and Nevett Steele, Jr., Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., on brief for appellee.
Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, and BRYAN and BUTZNER, Circuit Judges.
In his appeal from his conviction for criminal contempt, C. Oran Mensik makes the following assignments of error:
On December 12, 1963, the appellant was found guilty of three counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. He was released on bond pending his appeal. On March 18, 1968, this Court affirmed his conviction, United States v. Grow, 394 F.2d 182 (4th Cir. 1968), and on October 14, 1968, his petition for a writ of certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court. 393 U.S. 840, 89 S.Ct. 118, 21 L.Ed.2d 111. He was ordered to surrender himself and begin service of his sentence on November 4, 1968, by Judge Roszel C. Thomsen; however, he failed to appear as ordered, for which he was convicted of two counts of criminal contempt.
Mensik was arrested on May 29, 1969, in New York by F.B.I. Agents. Since his arrest was pursuant to the authority of an outstanding arrest warrant, we hold that assignment A is without merit. Moreover, Mensik's status at the time of his arrest was that of an escapee and "the provisions of * * * rule 40 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure may not be availed of by a prisoner in escape status." Bandy v. United States, 408 F.2d 518, 521 (8th Cir. 1969). For this reason, we also find no merit in assignment B.
We also conclude that Mensik's search and seizure claims, assignments C and D, are without merit. The record reveals that Mensik was arrested at John F. Kennedy Airport and taken to a federal detention center. There he was searched and certain items of evidence were seized from his person. These items were later properly admitted into evidence as the product of a reasonable search of the defendant's person incident to a lawful arrest.
Mensik's next claim that he was not notified of the forfeiture of his bond, assignment E, has no legal significance to this appeal. Accordingly, we hold that it is without merit.
Assignments F, G, and H all involve the notice requirements of rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 42(b) provides in part that "the notice shall state the time and place of hearing, allowing a reasonable time for the preparation of the defense, and shall state the essential...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
U.S. v. Leyva, 74-3565
...435 F.2d 1094, 1099 (7th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 911, 91 S.Ct. 874, 27 L.Ed.2d 809 (1971). But see United States v. Mensik, 440 F.2d 1232, 1234 (4th Cir. 1971). However, defendant did not object below to indictment, nor does he present this objection on appeal, except as it might......
-
U.S. v. Armstrong, s. 84-1255
... Page 700 ... 781 F.2d 700 ... UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, ... Clarence S. ARMSTRONG, William ... Mensik, 440 F.2d 1232, 1234 (4th Cir.1971) (per curiam). Although an indictment ... ...
-
U.S. v. Williams
...Court for the District of Nevada, 543 F.2d 69 (9th Cir. 1976); United States v. Avery, 447 F.2d 978 (4th Cir. 1971); United States v. Mensik, 440 F.2d 1232 (4th Cir. 1971). In these cases the indictments were for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 401(3). The prosecutions were commenced without any ......
-
U.S. v. Blechman
...Court for the District of Nevada, 543 F.2d 69 (9th Cir.1976); United States v. Avery, 447 F.2d 978 (4th Cir.1971); United States v. Mensik, 440 F.2d 1232 (4th Cir.1971). In these cases the indictments were for violations of 18 U.S.C. s 401(3). The prosecutions were commenced without any pri......