Opinion ID: 379476
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Decoster as a Fugitive from Justice

Text: 185 The dissent comments critically about the seventeen month period between the date of the offense and appellant's trial. It fails to recognize that over eight months of this delay was caused by Decoster jumping bail and remaining a fugitive. The facts are delineated in the Government's Supplemental Brief 3: 186 On January 21 appellant absconded from the Black Man's Development Center and never returned. (The) Bail Agency then reported that appellant had further violated the conditions of his release by reporting only once since being released. When the case was called for trial on February 9, appellant did not appear, and a bench warrant issued. Appellant was not rearrested until September 1971, after his codefendants in this case had pleaded guilty (at their trial) on June 18, 1971. 187 The trial was also delayed because one of the primary prosecution witnesses, Mr. Crump, was seriously injured in an automobile accident. The seventeen month delay, therefore, was not caused by any fault on the part of the Government.