Travis O. Spaulding v. United States

This is an appeal from a conviction upon two counts of robbery in the District Court of Alaska, Third Judicial Division. Appellant’s contentions are many; we shall discuss them in numerical form.

1. Appellant contends that by holding him in excessive bail which he was not able to meet and by denying his motion for a continuance, the trial court denied him a fair trial in violation of due process of law. Although appellant was incarcerated prior to trial and thus was inhibited from devoting his fullest energies to the preparation of his defense, his court-appointed counsel had one full week in which to prepare the case. In light of appellant’s inability to show prejudice, other than a nebulous allegation that certain unamed witnesses could not be located, we think that the week’s time which appellant’s counsel had to prepare for trial, despite his client’s inability to assist, was not so short as to be unconstitutional. See Avery v. State of Alabama, 1940, 308 U.S. 444 , 60 S.Ct. 321 , 84 L.Ed. 377 ; Torres v. United States, 9 Cir., 1959, 270 F.2d 252 .

2. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a change of venue on the grounds that prejudice…