F. Darold Windsor v. United States

384 F.2d 535 F. Darold WINDSOR, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 19174. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Sept. 15, 1967. Michael J. Hemovich, Bantz, Hemovich & Schultheis, Spokane, Wash., for appellant. Sylvan A. Jeppesen, U.S. Atty., Boise, Idaho, for appellee. Before POPE, HAMLEY and MERRILL, Circuit Judges. MERRILL, Circuit Judge: 1 Appellant (with certain codefendants) stands convicted of mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud. 18 U.S.C. 1341, 371. There is no question whatsoever of his involvement in an unsavory, high-pressure, fly-by-night scheme for the promotion of land sales. The dispute which this case presents is whether he was a party to or aware of that conduct of his codefendants which elevated this exercise in caveat emptor to the level of an outright swindle. The question upon appeal is whether the record supports his conviction. 2 Appellant is an attorney practicing in Portland, Oregon. In May, 1962, he drew up and filed articles of incorporation for Consolidated Homes Corp., and Oregon corporation. Two of his codefendants were among the incorporators and officers. The headquarters and mailing address was appellant's…

Appellant (with certain codefendants) stands convicted of mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 , 371. There is no question whatsoever of his involvement in an unsavory, high-pressure, fly-by-night scheme for the promotion of land sales. The dispute which this case presents is whether he was a party to or aware of that conduct of his codefendants which elevated this exercise in caveat emptor to the level of an outright swindle. The question upon appeal is whether the record supports his conviction.

Appellant is an attorney practicing in Portland, Oregon. In May, 1962, he drew up and filed articles of incorporation for Consolidated Homes Corp., an Oregon corporation. Two of his codefendants were among the incorporators and officers. The headquarters and mailing address was appellant’s Portland office.

Lake Coeur d’Alene is located in the panhandle of Northern Idaho, which still boasts substantial areas of untouched countryside. Upon this Eden, Consolidated Homes Corp. descended in classic confrontation of free enterprise with unguarded natural resource. Operating under the trade name of Lakeview Estates, the entrepreneurs proceeded in the following…

(dissenting).

The court lists at least ten details of the plan or scheme in which the appellant participated. Because he is an attorney he drew up and filed articles of incorporation for Consolidated Homes Corp., whose incorporators and officers were two codefendants; he prepared and handled all the contracts for acquiring the property which was to be used as the basis for the sales; he drew up the. contracts and deeds on sales. He knew the contents of what the court terms “bait” letters, 12,000 of them, which he admitted being “a fast sales gimmick” and he knew the contents of a later letter sent to purchasers advising that the subdivision was sold out when the plot began to fold up. Further, when it appeared that some of the prospective purchasers were bothered about lack of promised improvements, appellant added a “rider” to the contract which glibly promised water, electricity and “all-weather roads” at such time as the purchaser built a home of “approved character” on the lot. As to this the opinion says: “How such a home was to be built without adequate access, water or electricity is not discussed.”

The opinion finds that “Appellant’s connection with all of this is clear.…