Harold N. Glickman v. United States

Glickman, a bail bondsman, told a federal grand jury that he had received no money from one Zavada, a federal fugitive whose bond had been forfeited. As a matter of fact, he had received $7,500 from a Mrs. Buckner, who was a friend of Zavada and a guarantor to Glickman and another on Zavada’s surety bond. Zavada had passed the money through Mrs. Buckner, who purchased a cashier’s check for $7,500 and gave it to Glickman.

Promptly thereafter, while still before the grand jury, Glickman was confronted with the endorsed cashier’s check. At this juncture, he did the only thing left to do: he told the truth. The truth shows Glickman knew where Mrs. Buckner got the money.

Glickman thereafter was indicted for perjury (there were additional counts). He was convicted of perjury at a trial before a judge, he having waived a jury. We affirm.

We find no merit to the appeal. The assertions here that Glickman was confused when he testified and that the question and answer were not material to the inquiry of the grand jury seem very plausible if one reads only appel lant’s brief. A reading of the record dispels any such notions. The contentions are specious at best. Appellant’s counsel is…