LEROY FRANCIS NACE, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that absconding from a pre-release guidance center constitutes an escape under 18 U.S.C. § 751, even with granted privileges.
Appellant, while serving a Dyer Act sentence, was permitted to leave a pre-release center for employment but failed to return. He was prosecuted for e…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Escape (18 U.S.C. § 751(A)) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is from the denial of appellant’s motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate a sentence against him for escape, 18 U.S.C. § 751.
Appellant, while in the custody of the Attorney General on a Dyer Act sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 2312, was sent to the Federal Pre-Release Guidance Center at Los Angeles, California, where he was permitted to go on a job with a private employer, as part of the Guidance Center program. He was under direction and obligation to return to the Guidance Center, but he failed to do so and instead absconded. He was prosecuted and sentenced for escape under 18 U.S.C. § 751.
Because of the freedom which was allowed him at the Guidance Center, he contended in his motion to vacate that he was not in such custody as could make his abscondment an escape. The contention is frivolous. Under 18 U.S.C. § 4082, the Attorney General was given custody of appellant for the term of the imprisonment fixed in his Dyer Act sentence. Appellant was engaged in the Service of that sentence at the Guidance Center at the time of his abscondment. Whatever may have been the privileges which he was permitted to enjoy, he was nevertheless under the legal restraint of his sentence and in the custody of the Attorney General. His abscondment from the restraint and custody was an escape under § 751.
Appeal dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Cluck, 542 F.2d 728 (8th Cir. 1976)
-
Forrest Dale McCULLOUGH, Jr. v. United States, 369 F.2d 548 (8th Cir. 1966)
-
Read v. United States, 361 F.2d 830 (10th Cir. 1966)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence