Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-08080/USCOURTS-ca10-90-08080-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joseph Michael Kalady
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

, 

I 

. F ILEO 

United States Courr of Appeals 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT MAY 3 0 1991 

&OBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

JOSEPH MICHAEL KALADY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 90-8080 

(D. C. No. CR88-094-02J) 

(D. Wyo.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P . 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The cause is therefore ordered 

Mr. Kalady, a federal prisoner, appeals prose the forfeiture 

of his appearance bond. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-8080 Document: 010110118042 Date Filed: 05/30/1991 Page: 1 
In December 1988 a federal grand jury returned a seven-count 

indictment against Mr. Kalady charging him with conspiracy, mail 

fraud, and wire fraud. Mr. Kalady was arrested in Chicago and 

taken before a magistrate judge who set bond in the amount of 

$4,500. Mr. Kalady and his sister executed this bond. The 

conditions of this bond were that Mr. Kalady would appear at such 

places and in accordance with "all orders and directions." 

Mr. Kalady was arraigned in Wyoming on January 3, 1989. Mr. 

Kalady's bond was continued and Mr. Kalady was ordered to appear 

for trial. Mr. Kalady failed to appear for his scheduled trial on 

May 3, 1989. A bench warrant was issued and Mr. Kalady was found 

at a monastery in Wisconsin and arrested there in November 1989. 

Mr. Kalady was returned to Wyoming where he was indicted for 

failure to appear in December 1989. 

The government then moved to dismiss the original charges due 

to a severe sickness of the government's key witness and the trial 

court granted this motion with prejudice in June 1990. Mr. Kalady 

pled guilty to the failure to appear charge in August 1990 and was 

sentenced to forty months. 1 

The district judge in the meantime ordered Mr. Kalady's bond 

forfeited. The district court made detailed findings of fact in 

its five-page order dated July 23, 1990. 

1 Mr. Kalady is appealing this conviction and sentence in a 

separate appeal, No. 90-8087. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-8080 Document: 010110118042 Date Filed: 05/30/1991 Page: 2 
1 

Among other things, the court found there was no order 

"releasing the $4,500 signature bond." The court concluded "there 

was no need to execute a further unsecured bond in this case, 

since a bond had been executed before the United States 

Magistrate." 

Mr. Kalady appeals this decision asserting, first, that the 

bond that should have been forfeited was the bond posted by a 

bondsman in a lesser amount. The district court found, based upon 

the record, that this bond was never posted. 

We must accept the district court's findings of fact unless 

they are clearly erroneous. Cf. United States v. Easterling, 921 

F.2d 1073, 1077 (10th Cir. 1990) (review of fact findings by a 

sentencing court is for clear error), cert. denied, __ S. Ct. 

(1991 WL 72541) (May 20, 1991). The record fails to support Mr. 

Kalady's position and we therefore cannot hold the district 

court's findings of fact in this regard to be clearly erroneous. 

Mr. Kalady next asserts that the bond posted in Chicago 

terminated when he appeared in Wyoming for his January 1989 

arraignment. Again, the record fails to support Mr. Kalady's 

contention. The terms of the bond and the district court's order 

continuing the bond are both clear and specific. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 90-8080 Document: 010110118042 Date Filed: 05/30/1991 Page: 3 
' 

In his reply brief, Mr. Kalady raises additional arguments 

including that the bond was unenforceable and as the bond "was 

only on an own-recognizance bond" there was no surety and cannot 

be forfeited. Mr. Kalady misperceives the law. 

The judgment of the district court ordering the bond to be 

forfeited is supported by facts in the record. No adequate 

showing has been made that the district court abused its 

discretion in ordering the bond to be forfeited. United States v. 

Vader, 630 F.2d 792, 794-95 (10th Cir.) (trial court has 

discretionary power to set aside a forfeiture order or remit it in 

whole or part), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1037 (1980). Said Judgment 

is therefore AFFIRMED. The pending motions to supplement the 

record are GRANTED. 

Entered for the Court: 

WADE BRORBY 

Circuit Judge 

-4-

Appellate Case: 90-8080 Document: 010110118042 Date Filed: 05/30/1991 Page: 4