No. 71-1167.United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
February 14, 1972.
Page 194
Richard J. Spelts, Asst. U.S. Atty. (James L. Treece, U.S. Atty., on the brief), for plaintiff-appellee.
Harris D. Sherman, of Sherman, Quinn Sherman, Denver, Colo., for defendant-appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.
Before HAMLEY,[*] SETH and McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judge.
[1] In a trial to the court Danny Craig Archer was found guilty of a violation of the Selective Service Act of 1967. 50 App. U.S.C. § 462(a). The specific charge was that[2] It is conceded that on June 16, 1970, an order was mailed Archer setting an induction date of July 7, 1970, and that such order was duly received by Archer. It is also admitted that Archer did not appear for induction on the appointed date. Archer, however, did appear for induction on July 8, 1970, on crutches as the result of a bullet wound in the left fourth toe. The fact that Archer did appear one day late, ostensibly for purposes of induction into the Armed Forces, is the root of the present controversy. [3] Archer first argues that the evidence does not support the charge, pointing out that he was charged with failing to report for induction on July 7, 1970, and “continuing to the date of the filing of the indictment”; whereas, the evidence showed that he did appear for induction on July 8, 1970. The Government’s position on this matter is that the allegation “continuing to the date of the filing of the indictment” is surplusage and that the gravamen of the charge is that Archer wilfully and knowingly failed to appear for induction on July 7, 1970. We agree with the Government. [4] Mere surplusage in an indictment may be disregarded and such disregard does not render the indictment invalid if sufficient remains to charge a crime. Bary v. United States, 292 F.2d 53“* * * from on or about the 7th day of July 1970, and continuing to the date of filing of this indictment [the indictment was filed October 6, 1970] * * * DANNY CRAIG ARCHER, wilfully and knowingly did fail and neglect to perform a duty required of him under and in execution of the Military Selective Service Act of 1967, and the rules, regulations and directions duly promulgated thereunder, in that he did fail and neglect to comply with an order of his local board to report for and submit to induction into the Armed Forces * * *.”
Page 195
sufficient.” The fact that Archer appeared at the induction station on July 8, 1970, is admissible evidence bearing on the issue of his wilfulness in failing to report on July 7, 1970, but does not ipso facto preclude a conviction for wilfully failing to report for induction on July 7, 1970.
[6] Concerning the issue of wilfulness, the trial court found, inter alia, that Archer wilfully failed to report for induction on July 7, 1970, and Archer contends on appeal that there is insufficient evidence to support such finding. We deem the issue of wilfulness and knowledge to be an issue of fact and we find ample evidence in the record to support the trial court’s resolution of the matter. United States v. Keine, 424 F.2d 39Page 243
32 F.4th 1259 (2022) DENVER HOMELESS OUT LOUD; Charles Davis; Michael Lamb; Sharron Meitzen; Rick…
684 F.3d 963 (2012) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adam FROST, Defendant-Appellant. No. 11-1122.United…
962 F.3d 1253 (2020) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Abel Eduardo CRISTERNA-GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant. No.…
PUBLISH ?UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS? FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ ESTATE OF VERA CUMMINGS,…
United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE…
United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH…