C. W. Caywood v. United States

Under the provisions of the Federal Property and Administrative Services-Act of 1949, 40 U.S.C.A. § 471 et seq.,. the Administrator of General Services is authorized to transfer, on the basis of need, to state departments of education, such equipment or supplies under the-control of any federal executive agency-’ as shall have been determined to be-surplus. In Arizona, distribution of such' surplus property to the schools and institutions was carried out by the Arizona Educational Agency for Surplus Property. Caywood was Assistant Superintendent of Public Information for Arizona. In this capacity, he was authorized to sign requisitions for necessary surplus property. Requisitions were-made on government DP-2 forms. These required the donee to certify in part that the property was destined for a school, college, or university operated by the state, and that the property donated would be used solely for educational purposes, also, that the request was-reasonable and proper in view of the-use to be made thereof.

On January 18, 1954, Caywood and! one Tompkins were indicted, 1 charged *221 with conspiracy “(1) to commit offenses against the United States of America, and (2) to defraud…

(concurring specially).

I agree that the judgment should be affirmed but as I am not prepared to approve all of the reasons given for affirmance in the foregoing opinion, I wish to indicate separately my own views.

In meeting the contention that the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations Judge Fee says: “Furthermore, the evidence showed no substantive crime of any kind had been committed until completion of the first transfer of an item of this property to an unauthorized innocent purchaser for value.” Elsewhere the same point is repeated in the suggestion that the United States was defrauded “for the first time” when the property came into the hands of a “bona fide purchaser for value without notice”. The suggestion is that until that time the crime charged had not been completed because there had not yet been accomplished a “frustration of the governmental purpose.”

I find myself unable to agree with that suggestion for I think that it could well be concluded from the evidence in this case that the offense charged had been completed and accomplished prior to the time when Caywood or Tompkins or either of them had sold the property to the purchasers. In any event…

(dissenting).

The following opinion was prepared by me and submitted to my associates. After many conferences my associates joined in an opinion upholding the conviction, whereas I had concluded that the judgment should be reversed on the ground that the statute of limitations had run prior to the date of the indictment. I am unable to agree with my associates, and evidence my dissent by the filing of my proposed opinion in which only the concluding paragraph has been changed, together with the personal pronoun throughout the opinion where appropriate, and a short paragraph added to footnote 11, page 26.

Under the provisions of the Federal' Property and Administrative Service Act of 1949, 1 the Administrator of Gen *233 eral Services is authorized to transfer on a basis of need to state departments of education, such equipment or supplies under the control of any federal executive agency as shall have been determined to be surplus. In Arizona, distribution, of such surplus property to the schools and institutions was carried out by the Arizona Educational Agency for Surplus; Property.

Caywood was Assistant Superintendent of Public Information for Arizona. In this capacity he…

232 F.2d 220 C. W. CAYWOOD, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 14417. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Feb, 10, 1956. Rehearing Denied March 20, 1956. Writ of Certiorari Denied June 11, 1956. See 76 S.Ct. 1051 . Douglas H. Clark, Shute & Elsing, W. T. Elsing, Phoenix, Ariz., for appellant. Jack D. H. Hays, U.S. Atty., Everett L. Gordon, Asst. U.S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for appellee. Before STEPHENS, POPE and FEE, Circuit Judges. JAMES ALGER FEE, Circuit Judge. 1 Under the provisions of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, 40 U.S.C.A. § 471 et seq., the Administrator of General Services is authorized to transfer, on the basis of need, to state departments of education such equipment or supplies under the control of any federal executive agency as shall have been determined to be surplus. In Arizona, distribution of such surplus property to the schools and institutions was carried out by the Arizona Educational Agency for Surplus Property. Caywood was Assistant Superintendent of Public Information for Arizona. In this capacity, he was authorized to sign requisitions for necessary surplus property. Requisitions were…