United States v. Joel P. Bekowies

Good Law
432 F.2d 8
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 29, 197025407_1California9,824 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wright, J.

Joel Bekowies appeals from his conviction for harboring and concealing a federal fugitive, 18 U.S.C. § 1071 , and for conspiring to do so, 18 U.S.C. § 371 . Concurrent sentences were imposed. We reverse for failure of the law enforcement officers to give defendant his Miranda warnings.

The record shows that on February 14, 1969, three agents of the F.B.I. and a Portland police officer went to Bekowies’ residence. They were armed with an arrest warrant for one James Nolen Davidson, wanted for violations of the Selective Service Act. Agent Hixon was assigned to cover the front of the residence “to make sure that nobody climbed out windows or doors.” (R.T. 6, 7.) Agents McLeod and Kaspar, and Police Officer Boggs entered the rear of the residence and, after checking out several other apartments, entered that of Bekowies. (R.T. 30, 41, 81).

The officers identified themselves and were admitted by one Jeffrey Weil, 1 who was living in the apartment with Mr. and Mrs. Bekowies, but claimed that he knew nothing about Davidson. He stated that he, Bekowies, and Mrs. Bekowies were the only persons in the apartment. Weil’s conversation with the officers took about fifteen minutes. (R.T.…

Dissenting Opinion

Carter, J.

(dissenting):

The majority reverses the convictions on two grounds. (1) Insufficient evidence to support the conspiracy conviction, and (2) Bekowies’ statements were the product of impermissible police interrogation and should not have been admitted. I agree with the majority on the first point. I cannot, however, accept the conclusion of my brethren on the second.

The admissibility of Bekowies’ statements to the police was thoroughly considered by the trial court at the suppression hearing. Bekowies and three investigating officers testified. The judge found “certainly no custody situation [was] involved on February 14 * * * Apparently [Bekowies] thought that he couldn’t leave, but he had no reasonable reason * * * I would say that this case falls squarely within Lowe v. United States, except that I don’t even think it gets that far.” Relying on the same legal standard and evidence considered by the trial court, but without the opportunity to have heard and observed the witnesses, the majority concludes that Bekowies was in custody or significantly deprived of his liberty. I cannot agree.

The majority does not specify which statements of Bekowies should have been excluded by…

Opinion

432 F.2d 8 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel P. BEKOWIES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 25407. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Aug. 24, 1970, Rehearing Denied Oct. 29, 1970. Morton A. Winkel (argued), Portland, Or., for appellant. Wm. B. Borgeson, argued), Ass't U.S. Atty., Sidney I. Lezak, U.S. Atty., Portland, Or., for appellee. Before CARTER, HUFSTEDLER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges. WRIGHT, Circuit Judge: 1 Joel Bekowies appeals from his conviction for harboring and concealing a federal fugitive, 18 U.S.C. 1071, and for conspiring to do so, 18 U.S.C. 371. Concurrent sentences were imposed. We reverse for failure of the law enforcement officers to give defendant his Miranda warnings. 2 The record shows that on February 14, 1969, three agents of the F.B.I. and a Portland police officer went to Bekowies' residence. They were armed with an arrest warrant for one James Nolen Davidson, wanted for violations of the Selective Service Act. Agent Hixon was assigned to cover the front of the residence 'to make sure that nobody climbed out windows or doors.' (R.T. 6, 7.) Agents McLeod and Kaspar, and Police Officer Boggs entered the rear of the residence and,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.