Dyhre v. Hudspeth

106 F.2d 286, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 2982
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
DecidedAugust 17, 1939
Docket1864
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 106 F.2d 286 (Dyhre v. Hudspeth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dyhre v. Hudspeth, 106 F.2d 286, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 2982 (10th Cir. 1939).

Opinion

LEWIS, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying petition for writ of habeas corpus.

On January 25, 1938, an indictment containing eight counts,-each charging use of the mails to defraud (18 U.S.C.A. § 338), was returned against petitioner in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. On the same day petitioner pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to a term of three years in the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas, on the first count and was placed on probation for a period of five years on the remaining counts. Petitioner was delivered to the Warden of said penitentiary February 3, 1938.

A copy of the indictment was attached to the petition. It first alleged that before, the dates of committing the offenses set out in eight counts that follow Alfred Dyhre, alias Alfred Stanley, alias G. L. Lewis, alias I. J. Knowles, devised a scheme to defraud named business houses of Lake Providence, Louisiana, by obtaining merchandise - by means of false and fraudulent representations ; that he represented that he had bank accounts in named banks and drew checks for various amounts payable to the persons to be defrauded, although he had no money on deposit therein and had no intention of the checks being paid. Count One continues :

“That the said defendant on or about the 8th day of October, Nineteen Hundred and 37, at Lake Providence, in the Parish of East Carroll, State of Louisiana, aforesaid, in the division and district aforesaid, so having devised the said scheme and artifice to defraud and in and for executing the scheme and artifice and in and for attempting so to do, and in and for defrauding by and through the said scheme and artifice, the said Pan-Am Service Station, which was one of the persons so intended to be defrauded, as aforesaid, by" and through the said scheme and as aforesaid, willfully, unlawfully, knowingly, feloniously, and fraudulently did cause to be placed in the post office of the said United States of America, a't Lake Providence, in the Parish of East Carroll, State of Louisiana, to be sent and delivered by the said post office establishment, to the said Bent County Bank of Las Animas, Colorado,- aforesaid, •a certain check contained in an envelope and duly stamped with uiicanceled postage, and addressed to The Whitney National Bank, New Orleans, La., which said envelope contained a check drawn on the Bent County Bank of Las Animas, Colorado, in the sum of $12.65 dated October 8, 1937, and signed G. L. Lewis; that at the time of the mailing of said check the said defendant knew that the name G. L. Lewis, signed to said check was purely *287 fictitious and by him falsely assumed and used, and the said check was caused to be sent to the said Bent County Bank of Las Animas, Colorado, by him, the said defendant, for the sole and only purpose of defrauding said corporation of the amount of said check, and at the time of writing and mailing said check he, the said defendant, well knew he had no funds on deposit in said bank to the credit of or in the name of G. L. Lewis, and did not intend that said check be paid contrary to the form of the statute” etc.

The remaining seven counts involve checks in smaller amounts, and are the same in substance as the first under which petitioner was sentenced, except some of the checks therein described are made payable to other persons, some of them were signed with the name Dyhre or Knowles, and some of them were drawn on the First National Bank, Las Animas, Colorado, or the Oak Grove Bank, Oak Grove, Louisiana. The mailing charged in each was the same as that charged in the first count. All the checks were alleged to have been mailed on the day they were dated, except the check in the third count was alleged to have been mailed on October 10, 1937, and dated October 20, 1937.

Petitioner alleged under oath in his application for the writ:

“That the facts are that he was guilty of cashing or negotiating eight separate checks for amounts ranging from $3.30 to $12.65, all of which checks were by him passed and cashed by merchants in or about Lake Providence in the Parish of East Carroll, in the State of Louisiana, and all of which checks were subsequently redeemed or made good by this petitioner, although this petitioner did not at the time said checks were passed or cashed as aforesaid, have in the banks upon which said checks were drawn, funds sufficient to pay same. That your petitioner did not, in any manner, use the United States mail to pass or cash said checks or in any other manner in connection with any of the transactions involving the same, nor did your petitioner authorize or direct any person, bank or other corporation to, in any manner, use the mails in passing or cashing said checks.”

There was no denial at the hearing of the facts so stated by petitioner-appellant.

The Warden’s response pleaded the judgment and sentence of petitioner; and alleged that petitioner signed a waiver December 29, 1937, asking that the charges against him in the Monroe division of the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana be transferred to any other division of said court that petitioner might enter a plea of guilty; that petitioner voluntarily, intelligently, and freely entered his plea of guilty; that the substance of the indictment was explained to him; and that petitioner at no time requested the appointment of counsel.

Petitioner Dyhre’s letter of December 29, 1937, requesting that the charges pending against him in the Monroe division of said court be transferred to any other division of the court in order that he might plead guilty thereto, was attached to the response.

J. Fair Hardin, Assistant United States Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, stated in an affidavit accompanying the response that he handled petitioner’s case; that upon arraignment the substance of the indictment was explained to petitioner; that Judge Ben C. Dawkins asked petitioner if he understood the charges and he said he did; that petitioner stated he wished to plead guilty; that he made no request of the court at any time for the appointment of counsel; that after entry of the plea of guilty the post office inspector made a statement of the facts in the case; that the affiant submitted petitioner’s criminal record to the court and advised the Judge that petitioner was suffering from tuberculosis and had been turned over to the federal authorities by the state authorities on that account, inasmuch as he was an ex-service man and was drawing a compensation of $50 a month from the Government; that Judge Dawkins asked the prisoner if he had any statement to make; that petitioner mentioned his physical condition, and the Judge stated the Government had proper facilities at the institution to which he was going to send him to take care of tubercular cases, and considering his past record it would be necessary to impose a sentence of three years; that petitioner communicated no request to affiant to withdraw his plea of guilty; that petitioner was first arrested by the state authorities; that upon learning petitioner had tuberculosis and was an ex-service man drawing compensation from the Government the service officer of the local American Legion Post obtained his hospital and other records; that the state authorities concluded that inasmuch as the state penitentiary had no facilities for handling a tubercular it would be to the prisoner’s in *288

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. John Sherman Miles
483 F.2d 1372 (Eighth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Richard Dennis Lynn
461 F.2d 759 (Tenth Circuit, 1972)
The United States of America v. Robert S. Strauss
452 F.2d 375 (Seventh Circuit, 1972)
United States v. William Horace Decker
411 F.2d 306 (Fourth Circuit, 1969)
Fred L. Bliss v. United States
354 F.2d 456 (Eighth Circuit, 1966)
United States v. Pihakis
123 F. Supp. 859 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1954)
United States v. Kuiken
101 F. Supp. 929 (W.D. Texas, 1951)
Bauman v. United States
156 F.2d 534 (Fifth Circuit, 1946)
Sheridan v. United States
152 F.2d 57 (Sixth Circuit, 1945)
United States v. Bauman
66 F. Supp. 465 (W.D. Louisiana, 1945)
Kann v. United States
323 U.S. 88 (Supreme Court, 1944)
Rosenbloom v. Hunter
143 F.2d 673 (Tenth Circuit, 1944)
Steiner v. United States
134 F.2d 931 (Fifth Circuit, 1943)
Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann
317 U.S. 269 (Supreme Court, 1943)
United States v. McKay
45 F. Supp. 1001 (E.D. Michigan, 1942)
Guardalibini v. United States
128 F.2d 984 (Fifth Circuit, 1942)
Huntley v. Schilder
125 F.2d 250 (Tenth Circuit, 1942)
United States v. Lowe
115 F.2d 596 (Seventh Circuit, 1940)
Morris v. United States
112 F.2d 522 (Fifth Circuit, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
106 F.2d 286, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 2982, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dyhre-v-hudspeth-ca10-1939.