Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page

doc

Scholar

Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity

localId

4520694

label

Nixon Pardon - General (1)

core

doc

dtoType

document

citationUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4520694

pageCount

Source metadata

4520694

sourceUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4520694

contentType

document

title

Nixon Pardon - General (1)

citationUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4520694

collections

Philip W. Buchen Files

Philip Buchen's General Subject Files

subjects

Nixon, Richard M. (Richard Milhous), 1913-1994

Presidential campaign, 1976

Law and legislation

iiifBase

https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0019/574067/Batch0002/38-0019-f-4520694.pdf

thumbnailUrl

https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0019/574067/Batch0002/38-0019-f-4520694.pdf

largeImageUrl

https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0019/574067/Batch0002/38-0019-f-4520694.pdf

imageCount

hasImages

yes

source

import

hasTranscription

Source extras

url

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4520694

naId

4520694

coverageEndDate

logicalDate

1976-08-01

month

year

1976

coverageStartDate

logicalDate

1974-08-01

month

year

1974

itemCount

levelOfDescription

fileUnit

recordType

description

ocrSource

nara-archive

Single page context

seq

pageIndex

type

document

url

https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0019/574067/Batch0002/38-0019-f-4520694.pdf

mediaId

f550bc9df82330d7

ocrText

The original documents are located in Box 32, folder "Nixon Pardon - General (1)" of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized. Digitized from Box 32 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library CRIMINAL CODES Operations Branch Division of Information Systems Administrative Office of U. S. Courts Washington, D.C. 20544 R. 6/73 GREATO LIBRATA CONTENTS Section 1. Federal Offender Statistics 2. Bulletin No. 510--District Court Offices and Statistical Code Numbers 3. District Identification Codes - 1940-1972 4. Criminal Offense Code 5. Instructions for Processing Criminal Forms NOTE: Instructions used by Clerks of Court appear in Federal Offender Statistics, Revised 5-73 Instructions for reporting persons placed under supervision of Federal Probation System contained in Chapter 11 of the U.S. Probation Officers' Manual. Reports of Federal Offender Statistics appear in: Annual Report of the Director Semi-Annual Report of the Director Federal Offenders in U. S. District Courts--Annual FEDERAL OFFENDER STATISTICS Until 1935 clerks of the district courts made summary reports to the Washington office. Under Attorney General Homer Cummings, these reports were furnished on a case-by-case basis using the JS-1 summary form, and the JS-2 filing and JS-3 termination cards. The A.O. continued this procedure beginning in 1941. The present cards with only four revisions since 1941 were used to facilitate the keypunch operation since originals were used until 1969 as master records. Now we retain the filing cards for use in looking up old cases and the terminations to cross check with probation reports and for reference. SECTION 1. Criminal filings in FY 1972 CASES DEFENDANTS Indictments 31,601 45,494 Indictment waived 4,402 5,126 Information 10,268 11,693 From state courts 62 126 Fed. Juvenile Delinquency Act 668 720 Other 42 46 The JS-2 case card tells us: A. District, Office and Docket number and date filed B. Defendants in such cases C. Name of each defendant D. Offenses charged including number of counts (only major offense is used) E. Proceeding by which case was docketed: 1. Indictment 2. Indictment waived 3. Information 4. Removal from state court 5. FJDA 6. Other F. Rule 20 F.R.Cr.P. transfer G. Reopens, corrections, supplementary reports F&G A B c DISTRICT OFFICE DOCKET NUMBER DATE FILED DEFT. NO. NEW R.20 4 NAMES OF DEFENDANTS (LAST NAME FIRST) 9 REOPEN COR 2 3 5 1 6 I PROCEEDING COMMENCED BY: 2 1 INDICTMENT REMANDED FROM 4 7 APPEAL FROM APPELLATE COURT U.S. MAGISTRATE 3 2 INFORMATION 5 REMOVED FROM STATE COURT 9 F.J.D.A. 4 OF INDICTMENT 3 WAIVER REINSTATED (INFORMATION) 6 OR REOPENED OTHER 5 RULE 20 8 DISTRICT NO. DOCKET NUMBER (ALSO CHECK PROCEEDING COMMENCED. ABOVE) 6 TRANSFER RETURNED 8 7 II OFFENSE OR OFFENSES CHARGED 8 U.S. Code (LIST AND NUMBER ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS ON BACK) Title and Section Description of Offense 7 No. of Counts 1 2 INITIAL CRIMINAL DOCKET REPORT-J.S. 2 REV. 1972 3 MAIL TO: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, U.S. COURTS, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544 BPI7048 BSC - 2 - JS-3 Termination card tells us: Defendant accounting Not Convicted # Convicted A. Dist/0ffice/Docket No./Date terminated. X X B. Rule 20 X X C. Name X X D. Duplicate defendant X X E. Method of disposition X X F. Judge - X G. Type of counsel X X 11. Observation and study - X I. Sentence - X J. Procedure under law - X Definite (regular) YCA FJDA Indeterminate Probation Variations Split Mixed A C&D RECEIVED DISTRICT OFFICE DOCKET NUMBER DEFT NO DATE TERMINATED NAME OF DEFENDANT (LAST NAME FIRST) BY RULE 20 FROM: B FROM 2 F.E.A 9 NOT GULTY DATE NOT GUILTY DATE V OTHER DISPOSITION: I INITIAL NOLD LAST NOLO E GURTY GURLTY OF ALL OFFENSES CHARGED: CF PART OF OFFENSES CHARGED 1R.4. 10 NCT I NOT DAYS OF DATE AUDGE GUILTY GUILTY TRIAL SPECIFY UNDER PROPER HEADING II JURY COURT F GREY GUILTY III OFFENSES OF WHICH CONVICTED: CONVICTED OF ALL OFFENSES CHARGED NOMED : OR DISCONTINUED OF PART OF OFFENSES OR OF LESSER OFFENSE (SPECIFY) IV SENTENCE: QUASHED OR DISMISSED I OTHER TOTAL SENTENCE ISPEC " STATUTORY PROCEDURE YES FINAL CRIMINAL DOCKET REPORT-DEFENDANT -J.S. 3(REV. 1972) VI DOES THIS REPORT SHOW THE FINAL DISPOSITION OF ALL OFFENSES CHARGED? BPI6901 BSC OBSERVATION NO DATE 0 REGULAR 4 5010c VII COUNSEL CJA APPT 1 PRIVATE 2 WAIVED 3 0 NONE 3 5010. 1 4208 A-1 5 FIDA 1 4244 4 4200bc 2 4208 A-2 J OTHER APPT 4 NONE 5 PUBLIC COMMUNITY DEFENDER 6 H 0 4253a 2 5034 5 4252 3 50106 7 42536 G X 28:2902a.b 0 21:844b MAIL TO: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, U.S COURTS, WASHINGTON, D C. 20644 GER - 3 - Total defendants terminated FY 1972 With 3 territories Without 3 territories Type and D. C. Gross 62,491 61,806 Rule 20 1,963 1,962 Duplicate defendants 7,427 7,317 NET DEFENDANTS 53,101 52,527 Used in AR 1972 Tables D-4, D-5, D-4a and D-5a and D-6 and D-7 For the Federal Offender Statistics analysis we add age, race, sex and prior criminal record from the Probation Form 3 furnished separately by the U. S. probation officer for all defendants convicted. How these statistical reports are used: JS-1 is used for keeping manual account of activity by district and office. JS-2 is used in Annual Report and Federal Offenders. JS-3 is used in Annual Report and when demographic data is added, this material is summarized for Federal Offender Statis- tics reports. More directly the various computer tabulations are used for answering questions about the type of prosecution carried out in the courts using the 4-column offense code and the outcome of the individual defendant in each case. Studies are made by Congressional Committees, FJC and for internal use. Publications are: 1. Annual Report of the Director 2. Federal Offenders in U. S. District Courts 3. Crimes and Sentences (1967-1971) 4. Statistical Abstract of the U. S. - 4 - Other requests received from : Department of Justice Selective Service Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals Supreme Court Library of Congress. - Legislative Research General Accounting Office Congressional Committees on Juvenile Delinquency, Organized Crime, Constitutional Rights, Government Operations Congressional requests - 5 - Bulletin No. 510 - Revised March 1972 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS SUPREME COURT BUILDING WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544 ROWLAND F. KIRKS DIRECTOR WILLIAM E. FOLEY March 21, 1972 DEPUTY DIRECTOR TO : Clerks of Court Federal Probation Officers Referees in Bankruptcy SUBJECT: 1. Revision of United States District Court Offices Statistical Code Numbers. 2. Mailing of statistical reports to Administrative Office of the United States Courts 1) With the establishment of additional places for holding court and the enactment of P. L. 92-208 establishing the Middle District of Louisiana, we are providing herewith a re- vised list of United States District Court Offices statistical code numbers which are to be used in identifying all statis- tical forms provided to the Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts. The revised list supercedes any other lists on hand and is to be used beginning April 1, 1972 to identify the District Court and Office on the following statistical forms: Criminal: JS-1, JS-2, and JS-3 Civil: JS-5, JS-6, and JS-9 Trials: JS-10 (Both white and blue copies) Bankruptcy: BK forms and JS-19 and JS-22 Probation: Form 3's, Form 9, and Form 5 Additional copies of this listing can be obtained on request. 2) The Division of Information Systems recently underwent reorganization and the Operations Branch now handles all statistical reports. This relocation, along with the out of date addresses used by many districts, causes delays in the routing of statistical reports to the Operations Branch. In order to prevent mis-routing of mail and certain delay beginning with the March 1972 reports use the following address for all statistical reports noted under (1) above: OPERATIONS BRANCH, DIS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS WASHINGTON, D. C. 20544 SECTION 2. Bulletin No. 510 - Revised March 1972 - Cont. It would also be very helpful if each envelope is noted as to contents, such: Civil Only; Probation Only; Both Civil and Criminal. If all reports are being submitted, show Statistical Reports on the envelope. Paue C. Paul C. Bender Chief, Division of Information Systems Attachment Revised 3-72 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS DIVISION OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OFFICE CODE NUMBERS FOR USE BY CLERKS OF COURT AND PROBATION OFFICERS The following U. S. District Court Office code numbers are to be used in identifying district and office when preparing statistical forms furnished to the Division of Information Systems, Adminis- trative Office of the United States Courts. District Office District Office Code Number District Code Number District 090 1 D. of C. 206 New York, N. : 1 Albany 100 Maine: 2 Auburn 1 Bangor 3 Binghamton 2 Portland 4 Malone Massachusetts: 5 Syracuse 101 Utica 1 Boston 2 New Bedford 207 New York, E. : 3 Springfield 1 Brooklyn 4 Worcester 2 Mineola 3 Westbury 102 New Hampshire: 208 New York, S.: 1 Concord 1 New York City 2 Littleton 209 New York, W. : 103 Rhode Island: 1 Buffalo 1 Providence 2 Canandaigua 3 Elmira 104 Puerto Rico: 4 Jamestown 1 Mayaguez 6 Rochester 2 Ponce 3 San Juan 210 Vermont: 1 Brattleboro 205 Connecticut: 2 Burlington 2 Hartford 3 Montpelier 3 New Haven 5 Rutland 5 Bridgeport 6 Windsor 6 Waterbury 7 Saint Johnsbury 7 New London - 2 - 311 Delaware: 420 1 South Carolina, E. : Wilmington 1 Aiken 2 Charleston 312 New Jersey: 3 Columbia 1 Camden 4 Florence 2 Newark Trenton 5 Orangeburg 3 Greenville 313 Pennsylvania, E: 7 Spartanburg 1 Easton 8 Anderson 2 Philadelphia 9 Greenwood 3 Media 4 O Rock Hill Reading 5 11 314 Allentown Darlington Pennsylvania, M. : 422 Virginia, E. : 1 Harrisburg 1 Alexandria 2 Lewisburg 2 Norfolk 3 Scranton 3 Richmond 4 Williamsport 4 Newport News 5 Wilkes Barre 423 315 Virginia, W. : Pennsylvania, W. : 1 Abingdon 1 Erie 2 Big Stone Gap 2 Pittsburgh 3 Charlottesville 4 Danville 416 Maryland: 5 Harrisonburg 1 Baltimore 6 Lynchburg 2 Cumberland 7 Roanoke 3 Denton 424 417 West Virginia, N. : North Carolina, E. : 1 Clarksburg 1 Clinton 2 Elkins 2 Elizabeth City 3 Martinsburg 3 Fayetteville 4 4 Parkersburg New Bern Raleigh 56 Wheeling 5 Fairmont Washington 7 Wilmington 425 8 West Virginia, S. : Wilson 1 Bluefield 418 2 Charleston North Carolina, M. : 3 Huntington 1 Durham 4 Lewisburg 2 Greensboro 5 Beckley 3 Rockingham 4 Salisbury 526 Alabama, N. : 56 Wilkesboro 1 Anniston Winston Salem 2 Birmingham 3 Florence 419 North Carolina, W. : 4 Gadsden 1 Asheville Bryson City 56 Huntsville 2 Jasper 3 Charlotte 7 Tuscaloosa 4 Shelby 8 Decatur 5 Statesville 6 Rutherfordton - 3 - 527 Alabama, M. : 53L Louisiana, E. : 1 Dothan 2 New Orleans 2 Montgomery *53N Louisiana, M. : 3 Opelika 3 Baton Rouge 536 Louisiana, W. : 528 Alabama, S. : 1 Alexandria 1 Mobile 2 Lake Charles 2 Selma 3 Monroe 4 Opelousas 529 Florida, N. : 5 Shreveport 1 Gainesville 6 Lafayette 2 Marianna 3 Pensacola 537 Mississippi, N. : 4 Tallahassee 1 Aberdeen 5 Panama City 2 Clarksdale 3 Oxford 53A Florida, M. : 4 Greenville 1 Fernandia 5 Ackerman 2 Fort Myers 3 Jacksonville 538 Mississippi, S. : 4 Live Oak 1 Biloxi 5 Ocala 2 Hattiesburg Orlando 3 Jackson 7 St. Petersburg 4 Meridian Tampa 5 Vicksburg 6 Gulfport 53C Florida, S. : 539 Texas, N. : 1 Miami 1 Abilene 2 Fort Pierce 2 Amarillo 4 Key West 3 Dallas 9 West Palm Beach 4 Fort Worth 10 Fort Lauderdale 56 Lubbock 53E Georgia, N. : San Angelo 1 Atlanta 7 Wichita Falls 2 Gainesville 3 Newnan 540 Texas, E. : 4 Rome 1 Beaumont 2 Marshall 53G Georgia, M. : 3 Paris 1 Albany 4 Sherman 2 Americus 3 5 Texarkana Athens Tyler 4 Columbus 5 Macon 541 Texas, S. : Thomasville 1 Brownsville 7 Valdosta 2 Corpus Christi 3 Galveston 53J Georgia, S. : 4 Houston 1 Augusta 2 Brunswick 56 Laredo Victoria Fu 3 Dublin 4 Savannah 5 Waycross Swainsboro *Effective April 16, 1972. P.L. 92-208. For statistical purposes, effective April 1, 1972. - 5 - 757 Wisconsin, E. : 866 Missouri, W. : 1 Green Bay 2 Jefferson City 2 Milwaukee 3 Joplin 3 Oshkosh 4 Kansas City 758 Wisconsin, W. : 56 St. Joseph Springfield 1 Eau Claire 2 La Crosse 867 Nebraska: 3 Madison 4 Lincoln 4 Superior 7 North Platte 5 Wausau 8 Omaha 860 Arkansas, E. : 868 North Dakota: 1 Batesville 1 Bismarck 2 Helena 2 Grand Forks 3 Jonesboro 3 Fargo 4 Little Rock 4 Minot 5 Pine Bluff 869 South Dakota: 861 Arkansas, W. : 1 Aberdeen 1 El Dorado 2 Deadwood 2 Fort Smith 3 Pierre 3 Harrison 4 Sioux Falls 4 Texarkana 5 Rapid City 5 Fayetteville Hot Springs 97X Alaska: 1 Juneau 862 Iowa, N. : 2 Nome 1 Cedar Rapids 3 Anchorage 2 Dubuque 4 Fairbanks 3-4 Fort Dodge 5 Ketchikan Mason City 5 Sioux City 970 Arizona: Waterloo 2 Phoenix & Prescott 863 Iowa, S. : 4 Globe & Tucson 1 Council Bluffs 5 Florence 2 Creston 971 California, N. : 3-4 Davenport 1 Eureka Des Moines 3 San Francisco 56 Keokuk 4 Oakland Ottumwa 5 San Jose 6 Palo Alto 864 Minnesota: 972 California, E. : 1 Winona 1 Fresno 2 Mankato 2 Sacramento 3-4 St. Paul 3 Redding Minneapolis 56 Duluth Fergus Falls 865 Missouri, E. : 1 Cape Girardeau 2 Hannibal St. Louis - 6 - 973 California, C. : 1082 2 Colorado: Los Angeles 1 Denver 974 2 Durango California, S. : 3 Grand Junction 3 San Diego 4 Montrose 975 Hawaii: 56 Pueblo 1 Honolulu Sterling 976 1083 Kansas: Idaho: 1 Fort Scott 1 Boise 2 2 Coeur D'Alene Kansas City 3 Leavenworth 3 Moscow 4 4 Salina Pocatello 5 Topeka 977 Wichita Montana: 7 1 Hutchinson Billings 8 2 Butte Dodge City 3 Glasgow 1084 4 Great Falls New Mexico: 1 5 Havre Albuquerque 2 Helena Las Cruces 3 7 Kalispell Las Vegas 8 5 Roswell Livingston 6 Santa Fe 9 Missoula 7 10 Silver City Lewistown 11 Miles City 1085 Oklahoma, N. : 978 1 Bartlesville Nevada: 2 Miami 1 Carson City 3 Pawhuska 2 Las Vegas 4 Tulsa 3 Reno 5 Vinita 4 Elko 1086 979 Oklahoma, E. : Oregon 1 Ada 1 Medford 9 Vale 2 Ardmore 2 Pendleton 10 Salem 4 Durant 3 Portland 11 Astoria 4 Burns 13 Hood River 56 Hugo Muskogee 5 Klamath Falls 12 Coquille 7 Okmulgee 6 Eugene 980 9 Poteau Washington, E. : 10 South McAlester 1 Yakima 2 Spokane 1087 3 Walla Walla Oklahoma ,W.: 1 4 Enid Richland 2 Guthrie 981 3 Lawton Washington, W. : 4 1 Mangum Bellingham 2 Seattle 56 Oklahoma City 3 Ponca City Tacoma 7 Woodward 8 Shawnee 9 Pauls Valley 10 Chickashe - 7 - 1088 Utah: 1 Ogden 2 Salt Lake City 1089 Wyoming: 1 Casper 2 Cheyenne 3 Evanston 4 Lander 5 Sheridan 0391 Virgin Islands: 1 Christiansted 2 Frederiksted 3 Charlotte Amalie 0592 Canal Zone: 1 Ancon (Balboa Division) 2 Balboa 3 Christobal 0993 Guam: 1 Agana Distribution - Clerks of Court Federal Probation Officers LIBRARY Division of Information Systems Administrative Office of the United States Courts Identification Codes for District Courts, 1940 through 1972 3 cols. only April 1, District 1940 1954 1961 1963 1966 1967 1972 (1) (2) (3) (4) District of Columbia X0 1290 - 090 - - 030 First Circuit Maine 10 0100 - - - - 100 Massachusetts 11 0101 - - - - 101 New Hampshire 12 0102 - - - - 102 Rhode Island 13 0103 - - - - 103 Puerto Rico 14 0104 - - - - 104 Second Circuit Connecticut 20 0205 - - - - 205 New York, N 21 0206 - - - - 206 E 22 0207 - - - - 207 S 23 0208 - - - - 208 W 24 0209 - - - - 209 Vermont 25 0210 - - - - 210 Third Circuit Delaware 30 0311 - - - - 311 New Jersey 31 0312 - - - - 312 Pennsylvania, E 32 0313 - - - - 313 M 33 0314 - - - - 314 W 34 0315 - - - - 315 Virgin Islands X9 1391 - 391 - - 391 Fourth Circuit Maryland 40 0416 - - - - 416 North Carolina, E 41 0417 - - - - 417 M 42 0418 - - - - 418 W 43 0419 - - - - 419 South Carolina, E 44 0420 - - 420 - - W 45 0421 - - 420 - - South Carolina - - - - 420 - 420 Virginia, E 46 0422 - - - - 422 W 47 0423 - - - - 423 West Virginia, N 48 0424 - - - - 424 S 49 0425 - - - - 425 Fifth Circuit Alabama, N 50 0527 - 526 - - 526 M 51 0528 - 527 - - 527 S 52 0529 - 528 - - 528 Florida, N 53 0530 - 529 - - 529 M - - - 530 - - 53A S 54 0531 - 531 - - 53C Georgia, N 55 0532 - - - - 53E M 56 0533 - - - - 53G S 57 0534 - - - - 53J Louisiana, E 58 0535 - - - - 53L M - - - - - - 53N W 59 0536 - - - - 536 Mississippi, N V1 0537 - - - - 537 S V2 0538 - - - - 538 Texas, N V3 0539 - - - t 539 E V4 0540 - - - - 540 S V5 0541 - I - - 541 W V6 0542 - - - - 542 Canal Zone X7 1392 - 592 - - 592 (-) Denotes no change to district code in this year. SECTION 3. For office codes see Bulletin 510 Revised. For district list of codes since 1940 see Identification Codes. Division of Information Systems Administrative Office of the United States Courts Identification Codes for District Courts, 1940 through 1972 - Continued 3 cols. only April 1, District 1940 1954 1961 1963 1966 1967 1972 (1) (2) (3) (4) Sixth Circuit Kentucky, E 60 0643 - - - - 643 W 61 0644 - - - - 644 Michigan, E 62 0645 - - - - 645 W 63 0646 - - - - 646 Ohio, N 64 0647 - - - - 647 S 65 0648 - - - - 648 Tennessee, E 66 0649 - - - - 649 M 67 0650 - - - - 650 W 68 0651 - - - - 651 Seventh Circuit Illinois, N 70 0752 - - - - 752 E 71 0753 - - - - 753 S 72 0754 - - - - 754 Indiana, N 73 0755 - - - - 755 S 74 0756 - - - - 756 Wisconsin, E 75 0757 - - - - 757 W 76 0758 - - - - 758 Eighth Circuit Arkansas, E 80 0860 - - - - 860 W 81 0861 - - - - 861 Iowa, N 82 0862 - - - - 862 S 83 0863 - - - - 863 Minnesota 84 0864 - - - - 864 Missouri, E 85 0865 - - - - 865 W 86 0866 - - - - 866 Nebraska 87 0867 - - - - 867 North Dakota 88 0868 - - - - 868 South Dakota 89 0869 - - - - 869 Ninth Circuit Arizona 90 0970 971 - - 970 970 California, N 91 0971 972 - - 971 971 E - - - - - 972 972 C - - - - - 973 973 S 92 0972 974 - - - 974 Idaho 93 0973 976 - - - 976 Montana 94 0974 977 - - - 977 Nevada 95 0975 978 - - - 978 Oregon 96 0976 979 - - - 979 Washington, E 97 0977 980 - - - 980 W 98 0978 981 - - - 981 Hawaii 99 0979 975 - - - 975 Alaska, 1 X1 1393 970 - - - - 2 X2 1394 970 - - - - 3 X3 1395 970 - - - - 4 X4 1396 970 - - - - Alaska - - - - - 97X 97X Guam X6 1397 993 - - I 993 Tenth Circuit Colorado 01 1080 082 - - - 082 Kansas 02 1081 083 - - - 083 New Mexico 03 1082 084 - - - 084 Oklahoma, N 04 1083 085 - - - 085 E 05 1084 086 - - - 086 W 06 1085 087 - - - 087 Utah 07 1086 088 - - - 088 Wyoming 08 1087 089 - - - 089 (1) Middle District of Florida established under P.L. 87-562, effective July 30, 1962. (2) Eastern and Western Districts of South Carolina consolidated under P.L. 89-242, effective October 7, 1965. Statistical Code 420 used for fiscal year 1966 for entire year. (3) Eastern and Central Districts of California established under P.L. 89-372, eftective September 18, 1966. Statistical Codes 97X, 970, 971, 972 and 973 for fiscal year 1967 used entire year. (11) Middle District of Louisiana established under P.L. 92-208, effective April 16, 1972. Statistical Codes 53A, 53C, 53E, 53G, 53J, 53L and 53N used beginning April 1, 1972. Operations Branch, D.I.S. CRIMINAL OFFENSE CODE Administrative Office of the United States Courts Division of Information Systems--Operations Branch, Criminal/Probation Section Effective Fiscal Years 1961 - 1972 The detailed offense list which will be shown in the tables published by the Administrative Office is controlled by the first two columns of the offense code. SECTION 4. D.I.S. - - Operations Branch March 1972 INTRODUCTION What follows is an offense classification devised in 1961 and amended from time to time with the passage of new legislation by the Congress of the United States. The seriousness of an offense is somewhat denoted by its classification number; however, the final determination as to the offense classification to use when there is a multiple count indict- ment or several separate indictments for one defendant is determined as follows: 1. The length of the maximum sentence is the first control. If the two charges were bank robbery and auto theft which respective- ly upon conviction would result in a 25-year and a 5-year sentence, bank robbery would be the offense classified. 2. When the maximum sentence for two or more offenses is the same, the offense against a person takes priority over a property crime. Thus, destruction of an aircraft (18 USC 32) and arson of a building with people in it (18 USC 81), each have a penalty of 20 years. For coding purposes the arson of a building would be classified as the offense. 3. Where the classification needs further delineation, the classifier (a) uses the offense which had a trial rather than the one with a plea of guilty; (b) favors the longer length of time from filing to disposition over a shorter period; (c) gives pref- crence to the district's own court case over one received by trans- fer by F. R. Cr. 20. For all attempts to commit a crime, proceedings under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act, conspiracies to commit an offense or crimes committed on any special maritime or territorial jurisdic- tion such as a military or Indian reservation, every effort should be made to classify the substantive offense. U. S. Code Code Offense Title and Section General offenses 1. Homicide 0100 A. Murder, first degree 18:1111 (a), 1153, 2113 (e) 0200 B. Murder, second degree 18:1111 (a), 1153 0300 C. Manslaughter 18:1112 (a), 1115, 1153 0310 D. Negligent homicide 18:1112 (a), 1115, 1153 2. Robbery 1100 A. Bank 18:2113 (a) (d) (e) 1200 B. Postal 18:2114 1400 C. Other 18:113 (b), 2111, 12 3. Assault 18:111, 113 (a) (b) (c), 114, 1500 A. Aggravated or felonious 372,1153,2231;26:7212 1560 B. Fair Housing Law 26-7212; 42:3601-3707 1600 C. Other 18:113 (d) (e) 29:530 4. Burglary - breaking & entering 2100 A. Bank 18:2113 (a) 2200 B. Postal 18:2115, 16 2300 C. Interstate commerce 18:2117 2400 D. Other 18:1153, 2111 5. Larceny & Theft 3100 A. Bank 18:2113 (b) (c) 3200 B. Postal 18:1702, 4, 7, 8 3300 C. Interstate commerce 18:659 3400 D. U. S. property 18:641 3600 E. Transportation, etc. of stolen property 18:2314 - 17 3700 F. Other - felony 18:661, 1153, 662 3800 G. Other - - misdemeanor 18:661, 1153, 662 6. Embezzlement & fraud Embezzlement 4100 A. Bank 18:656, 1005 4200 B. Postal 18:1709-11, 21, 27 C. Other 4310 1. Public moneys or property 18:641-43, 47-50, 52, 53 4320 2. Lending, credit & insurance institutions 18:657 4330 3. By officers of a carrier 18:660 4340 4. World War Veterans Relief 38:3501 4350 5. By officer or employee of U. S. 18:153, 646, 54 4390 6. Other 18:1025; 29:501, 502 Fraud D. Income tax 4510 1. Evade or defeat 26:7201, 2 (formerly 145 (b)) 4520 2. Other felony 18:287; 26:7206 (1) (2) (5) 4530 3. Failure to file 26:7203 (formerly 145 (a)) 4540 4. Other misdemeanor 26:3401-4, 6647,7404, 5, 7 - 1 - U. S. Code Code Offense Title and Section 4600 E. Lending & credit institutions 18:658, 1006, 8-14, 1907, 9 4700 F. Postal & interstate wire, radio, etc. 18:1341-43, 1719, 20, 25 4800 G. Veterans & allotments 18:289; 37:251-54; 38:3502, 5; 50 App:1008, 2213a H. Other fraud 4900 1. Bankruptcy 18:152 4910 2. Marketing agreements & Commodity Credit 15:713, 14m(a)-(d) 4920 3. Securities & Exchange Commission 15:77a-bbbb,78a-jj, 79-79z 80a-b 4. Other tax 4931 a. Excise 26:4234, 4461, 62, 4901,5762 5821 (7201-3 penalties) 4932 b. Wagering 26:4401 (a) (b) (c), 11-13 21 (1) (2), (7201-3, 62 penalties) 4933 C. Other 26:7201-3, 7 4940 5. Railroad retirement & unemployment 45:228 a-y, 351-67, (228 m, 359 (a) penalties) 4950 6. Social security 42:301-1370(408, 1307, 1368 (a) penalties) 4960 7. False personation 18:449,706,711,911-17,1730 4970 8. Nationality laws (fraud citizenship) 18:911, 1015 4980 9. Passport fraud 18:1542-44 10. Other 4991* a. False claims & statements 18:287, 1001 4992* b. Conspiracy to defraud 18:286 4993* C. Conspiracy (general) 18:371 4994 d. False entries 18:2073 4999 e. Other See card index file for U.S. titles and sections 7. Auto theft 5100 A. Transportation, etc., of stolen motor vehicles or aircraft 18:2312-13 5200 B. Other auto theft 18:13 8. Forgery & counterfeiting 5500 A. Transportation of forged securities 18:2314 5600 B. Postal forgery 18:500 C. Other forgery 5710 1. Other U. S. forgery 18:471, 72, 78, 94, 95, 97, 98 5720 2. Other 18:1025 5800 D. Counterfeiting 18:471-74, 481, 485-87 500-3, (except forgery) - 2 - U. S. Code Code Offense Title and Section 9. Sex offenses 6100 A. Rape 18:113(a), 1153, 2031, 32 6200 B. White slave traffic & importing aliens 18:1328, 2421-24 6300 C. Other sex offenses 18:1153 10. Narcotics (See supplemental instructions) 6500 ) Prior A. Marihuana Tax Act 21:176(a); 26:4741-62, ) to 7237 penalty 6600 ) May 1, B. Narcotics - border registration 18:1407 6700 ) 1971 C. Narcotics - other 18:494, 1403, 6; 21:171-200, 6800 D. Controlled substances except 176 (a) ; 26:4701-36, 7237 penalty; 42:261 11. Miscellaneous general offenses 7100 A. Bribery 18:201-15, 224 B. Traffic offenses 7210 1. Drunken driving 18:13 7220 2. Traffic offenses 18:13 C. Escape 7310 1. Escape 18:751, 1073 7311 2. Jumping Bail 18:3146 7312 3. Bail Reform Act of 1966 18:3150 7313 4. Escape - Work Release 18:751 Program 18:4082 (d) 7320 5. Aiding or harboring 18:752, 55, 1071, 72, 1791, 1792 7400 D. Extortion, racketeering 18:872-77, 1951, 18:837 & threats 7401 1. Threats against the 18:871 President Beg. 7/1/69 E. Interstate travel or trans- 18:1952* portation in aid of racke- teering: 7410 1. Arson 7420 2. Bribery 7430 3. Extortion 7440 4. Gambling 7450 5. Liquor 7460 6. Narcotics 7470 7. Prostitution 7480 8. Racketeering 7490 9. Extortionate Credit 18:891-896 Transactions 7500 F. Gambling and lottery 15:1171-77; 18:13, 1301-4 7520 1. Travel in aid of racketeering 18:1953 7530 2. Transmit wagering information 18:1084 * Formerly coded 7520. - 3 - Code U. S. Code Offense Title and Section 7600 G. Kidnapping 7610 18:1201, 1202 H. Kidnapping 7700 18:13 I. Perjury 7800 J. Firearms & weapons 18:1621-23;22:1203:8:1357 (b) 15:901-9, 1242, 43; 26:5814, 7820 K. Firearms, unlawful possession 41, 51, 61; 49:1472 (L) 7830 18:App.1201-1202 L. Firearms 18:921-28 M. Other miscellaneous general offenses 7910 1. Arson 7920 18:13, 1153 2. Abortion 18:13 7930 3. Bigamy 18:13 7940 4. Malicious destruction of property 7950 18:13, 1362-63 5. Disorderly conduct 18:13 7961 6. Travel to incite to riot 7962 18:2101-2 7. Civil disorder 7990 8. Other 18:231-234 (0100 ifdeathresults) 18:13; 16: 9 (a) 12. Immigration laws 8710 ) 4th Col. A. Illegal entry 8:1325 8720 ) was X B. Illegal re-entry 8:1326 8730 ) prior to C. Other immigration 8740 ) FY 1971 8:1252, 82, 1324; 18:1546 D. Illegal entry (subsequent) 8:1325 8750*) *) E. Fraud citizenship & 18:911 alone or combined immigration laws 8900 with above Title 8 13. Liquor, Internal Revenue 26:5001-5693, (5601-8,7273 (a) 7206 (4) penalties) 14. Federal Statutes A. Agriculture & conservation 9110 1. Agricultural Acts 7:1-17, 511, 601-59, 9120 1281-1407 2. Federal Seed Act 7:1551-1610 9130 3. Game conservation Acts 16:256b, 661-68d, 671-94b, 852, 981-91; 18:41, 43, 9140 44; 25:216 4. Insecticide Act 7:135-135k 9150 5. Trespass on timber & government lands 9160 16:551; 18:1851-56 6. Packers & Stockyards Act 7:181-231 9170 7. Plant quarantine 7:151-67 9180 8. Handling of animals-- research 7:2131-2154 9200 B. Antitrust violations 9300 15:1-3, 13a, 20, 24 C. Fair Labor Standards Act 29:201-19 9400 D. Food & Drug Act 9500 21: (except 90, 171-200,234) E. Migratory Bird laws 16:701-18i 9600 F. Motor Carrier Act 49:301-27 (Ch. 8, Part II) G. National defense laws 9710 1. Selective Service Acts 9720 50 App:301-18, 451-70 2. Illegal use of uniform 9730 18:701-6, 11 3. Defense Production Act 1950 50 App:2061-2166 *8750 - Applies to 5 districts (Texas, Southern and Western, Arizona, California, Southern and New Mexico) - 4 - U. S. Code Code Offense Title and Section 4. Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 9731 a. Prices 9732 b. Rents 9733 C. Wages 9740 5. Alien registration 8:1301-6 6. Treason etc. 9751 a. Treason 18:2381 9752 b. Espionage 18:793, 94; 50 App: 618 9753 C. Sabotage 18:2151-56 9754 d. Sedition 18:953, 2384, 2387-90 9755 e. Smith Act 18:2385 9760 7. Curfew-restricted areas 18:1382, 83, 2152 9770 8. Exportation of war materials22:455, 1934; 50 App:2021-32 9780 9. Trading with Enemy Act (Foreign funds control, etc) 50 App: 1-31 9790 10. Other National defense See card index file for U. S. titles and sections 9791 11. Subversive Activities Control Act 50:786 (794 Penalty Sec.) H. Mail, transport obscene material 9810 1. Obscene mail 18:1461, 63, 1718 9820 2. Obscene matter in inter- state commerce 18:1462, 65 I. Other federal statutes 1. Civil rights 9901 a. Civil rights 18:241-44 9902 b. Election law violations 18:592-612 9910 2. Communication Acts, (incl. wire tapping) 47:220(e 301, 18:501, 2, 605, 1464 9911 a. Wire interception 18:2510-2520 3. Contempt 9921 a. Contempt 18:401, 2 9922 b. Contempt-Congressional 2:192 4. Customs laws 9931 a. Customs laws (except narcotics & liquor) 18:541-52 9932 b. Importing injurious animals & birds 18:42 5. Interstate commerce 9941 a. Connally Act-Hot Oil Act15:715 - 15K 9942 b. Transport convict made goods in interstate commerce 18:1761 9943 C. Railroad & transport- ation acts 49:2, 3, 41 (except Part II); 45:152, 181, 2 9944 d. Distruction of property interstate commerce 15:1281 6. Labor 9951 a. Transportation of strikebreakers 18:1231 - 5 - U. S. Code Code Offense Title and Section 9952 b. Taft Hartley Act (Labor Management Relations) 29:141-97 9953 E. Eight hour day on public works 40:321, 22 9954 d. Peonage 18:1581-88 9960 7. Liquor (excl. Internal Revenue) 18:545, 1154-56, 1262-65; 27:203,7 8. Marine 9971 a. Maritime & shipping 14:83-85; 18:2196, 97, laws 2271-79; 33:407-11, 433, 34, 441; 46:151-63, 526m 801-42 9972 b. Stowaways 18:2199 9973 C. Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 P.L. 92-75 9. Postal laws 9981 a. Non-mailable material 18:1715-16 (firearms, poison, etc) 9982 b. Injury to property 18:1705, 6 9983 C. Obstructing the mail 18:1701 9984 d. Violations by postal employees 18:1703, 12, 13, 20, 26 9989 e. Other postal laws See card index file for U.S. titles and sections 10. All other federal statutes 9991 a. Destroying federal property 18:1361, 2071 (a) (b) 9992 b. Intimidation of witnesses, jurors, etc. 18:1503-5 9993 C. Aircraft regulations 18:32, 35; 49:1301-1542 (except 1472(b)) 9994 d. Explosives (except on vessels) 18:832-35,844;50:121-14 9995 e. Gold Acts 12:95a, 248n: 31:773a-d, 821, 2a 9996 f. Train wrecking 18:1992 9999 g. Other See card index file for U.S. titles and sections Special situations 9999 Misprision of a felony 18:4 Code Accessory, etc. 18:3 According Offense in maritime and to the territorial jurisdiction substan- of U. S. 18:7 tive Laws of the States adopted offense for areas under Federal jurisdiction 18:3 - 6 - OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 MAY 1962 EDITION GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Memorandum TO FROM Jim : DIS McCafferty Staff Caffee DATE: August 19, 1971 SUBJECT: Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970--Supplemental Code Effective date for most of these provisions is the first day of the seventh month after October 26, 1970 or May 1, 1971 (P.L. 91-513). The new DAPCA of 1970 repeals prior sections of the U. S. Code which contain the offenses and penalties for: importation of narcotics, dangerous drugs and marihuana and provisions of the revenue laws relating to narcotics and marihuana The only laws not carried over to the new code are: 18 U.S.C. 1407 which requires narcotic addicts and violators to register prior to crossing our borders. (Repealed 5-1-71) and 21 U.S.C. 191, 192 and 193 which relate to importation and exportation of opium between the U. S. and China (Repealed 5-1-71) We will, of course, have pending prosecutions and sentences involving persons who have been charged with the former offenses which we have coded as: 6500 A. Marihuana Tax Act 21:176 (a) 26:4741-62,7237 Penalty 6600 B. Narcotics - border registration, 18:1407 6700 C. Narcotics - Other, 18:494;1403-6;21:171-200, except 176(a),26:4701-36,7237 Penalty; 42:261 For the above use DIS offense code for all criminal and for all probation cases in the system prior to May 1, 1971. Therefore, do not change the 6500, 6600 or 6700 codes to new codes shown below. - 7 - Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan New codes are to be used for all cases where the clerk of the court or the probation officer has indicated the particular violation under the DAPCA of 1970. In doing so, please keep three classification rules in mind. What offense upon conviction could result in the highest penalty and what drug law offense was being committed, that is, narcotic drug, marihuana or dangerous substance? What schedule of controlled substance (I, II, III, IV and V) was violated as shown as part of the description of the offense? When this is unknown, record as a 0. Further, was it selling, possession, importation, manufacture or records including prescription? Though the offenses and penalties are provided in Part II. Reference can be made to this list, however, each DAPCA case can be coded easily by using the classification appearing in Part I below: Part One The Drug Abuse and Prevention Act of 1970 (DAPCA) (Title 21 USC Sections 801-966) became effective on May 1, 1971. Using the informa- tion furnished by the Clerk of Court or the Probation Officer, code DAPCA offenses beginning July 1, 1971 as follows: Drug involved Code for Col. Schedule Number 1 and 2 (3rd Column) Marihuana 65 II, III, IV,V Narcotic (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (Opium, cocaine, heroin, etc.) 67 Use "0" if Schedule Controlled substance 68 is unknown For the fourth column of the offense code use: 1. for selling, distribution, or dispensing 2. for importation 3. for manufacture 4. for possession 5. records, prescriptions, fraudulent prescriptions Thus, if a person is reported charged with possession of marihuana (Schedule I), code 6514. Selling marihuana would be 6511. Selling opium (Schedule II) would be 6721. Selling methadone (Schedule II), 6821. Making a controlled substance, Barbital (Schedule IV), 6844. Refer to the statutes as required. Try not to code controlled substance if it is certain that it is marihuana or narcotic drugs. A list of the DAPCA Statutes and Penalties follow: - 8 - Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-513, October 27, 1970 84 Stat. 1264) Part D, Offenses and Penalties Special Title 21 Penalty Parole Section Description 1st & 2nd Offense Term Sec. 841b (1) A Create, manufacture, dis- $25,000 and/or 15 years; 3 yrs. tribute or dispense con- 2nd-$50,000 and/or 30 yrs 6 yrs. trolled narcotic drug under Schedules I and II B Create, manufacture, dis- $15,000 and/or 5 years; 2 yrs. tribute or dispense con- 2nd-$30,000 and/or 10 yrs 4 yrs. trolled non-narcotic drug under Schedules I, II, or III b (2) Create, manufacture, dis- $10,000 and/or 3 years; 1 yr. tribute or dispense con- 2nd-$20,000 and/or 6 yrs 2 yrs. trolled drug under Schedule IV b (3) Create, manufacture, dis- $5,000 and/or 1 year; None tribute or dispense con- 2nd-$10,000 and/or 2 yrs None trolled drug under Schedule V Sec. 842a (4) Knowing removal, altera- $25,000 and/or 1 year; None tion or obliteration of 2nd-$50,000 and/or 2 yrs None symbols or labels a (5) Knowing refusal or fail- $25,000 and/or 1 year; None ure to make, keep or 2nd-$50,000 and/or 2 yrs None furnish records as re- quired (6) Refusal to allow author- $25,000 and/or 1 year; None ized entry or inspection 2nd-$50,000 and/or 2 yrs None (7) Removing, breaking, in- $25,000 and/or 1 year; None juring, or defacing seal 2nd-$50,000 and/or 2 yrs None (8) Illegal use of information $25,000 and/or 1 year; None acquired in course of an 2nd-$50,000 and/or 2 yrs None authorized inspection Sec. 843a (2) Use of fictitious, re- $30,000 and/or 4 years; None voked or suspended regis- 2nd-$60,000 and/or 8 yrs None tration number in the course of manufacturing or distributing a con- trolled substance - 9 -. Special Title 21-Cont. Penalty Parole Section Description 1st & 2nd Offense Term Sec. 843a (3) Acquisition or possession $30,000 and/or 4 years; None of controlled substance by 2nd-$60,000 and/or 8 yrs None misrepresentation, fraud, etc. (4) Furnishing false informa- $30,000 and/or 4 years; None tion in any application, 2nd-$60,000 and/or 8 yrs None report or record required (5) Making, distributing or $30,000 and/or 4 years; None possessing anything 2nd-$60,000 and/or 8 yrs None designed to reproduce the identifying mark of any drug so as to render such drug a counterfeit substance b Use of communications $30,000 and/or 4 years; None facility in committing any 2nd-$60,000 and/or 8 yrs None act constituting a felony under Chapter 13 of this title Sec. 844 Possession of controlled $5,000 and/or 1 year; None substance 2nd-$10,000 and/or 2 yrs None Sec. 845 Distribution of controlled Double penalty of Sec. None substance to person under 841 (b) ; 2nd-triple penalty None 21 years of age of Sec. 841 (b) Sec. 847 Attempt and conspiracy Maximum prescribed for None the offense Sec. 848 Continuing criminal $100,000 and 10 yrs.-life None enterprise plus forfeiture of profits; 2nd-$200,000& 20 yrs.-life None plus forfeiture of profits; no probation or suspension Sec. 960b (1) Knowing or intentional importation or exporta- tion of controlled sub- stance -if narcotic drug in $25,000 and/or 15 years 3 yrs. Schedule I or II 2nd-$50,000 and/or 30 yrs 6 yrs. (2) -if other drug $15,000 and/or 5 years; 2 yrs. 2nd-$30,000 and/or 10 yrs 4 yrs. (2) -Schedule IV $15,000 and/or 5 years 1 yr. - 10 - Special Title 21-Cont. Penalty Parole Section Description 1st & 2nd Offense Term Sec. 961 Prohibited acts B Violation of Sec. 954- transshipment and intransit shipment of controlled sub- stances Sec. 961 (1) Civil--$25,000 Sec. 961 (2) 1 yr. and/or $25,000 Sec. 962a Second or subsequent of- fense under Sec. 960 (b) above Sec. 962b Second or subsequent of- Imprisonment and/or fense under Subchapter II fine double Sec. 961 (1) or 961 (2) Sec. 962c If second or subsequent In addition to imprison- conviction of Sec.960 (b) ment and fine twice special parole term Sec. 962d Sec. 851 applicable for sentencing dangerous special drug offender under Sec. 849 (see above) Sec. 963 Attempt and conspiracy Maximum prescribed for the offense - 11 - Administrative Office, U. S. Courts Division of Information Systems Criminal Section Instructions for Processing Criminal Forms in the Administrative Office, Fiscal Year 1972 (Revised) Termination Coding - Criminal Defendants - Form J.S. 3 and J.S. 4 Criminal Analysis Card, Revised Fiscal Year 1972 J.S. 3 Terminations Disposition and Sentence Coding At the time the J.S. 3's are matched to the pending tape a duplicate J.S. 3 is punched, interpreted and paired with each original J.S. 3. The yellow top stripe of the original and duplicate J.S. 3 shows the print-out of the filing information as follows: Proceeding, Offense, District, Office, Defendant number, Month and calendar year filed, and Defendant name. The duplicate J.S. 3 is pre-punched as follows: Card Col. Item 1-3 1. District 4 2. Office 5-10 3. Docket Number 11-12 4. Defendant Number 13-16 5. Date terminated, month and calendar year 18 6. Punched "8" for defendants disposed of by Rule 20 transfer 39 7. Type of proceeding Coding of J.S. 3's - Pass over all Rule 20 transfers, no coding is needed. The "8" which has been punched in Col. 18 provides for these. For all other J.S. 3's, from information provided on the original record, enter codes in red, in spaces provided in the lower left corner of the duplicate J.S. 3 as follows (information will be punched in the card as indicated; columns in parentheses indicate tape record fields): Card Col. Item 40-43 1. Offense at termination - Item III of J.S. 3. District of (29-32) Columbia only, code offense of which convicted. For dismissed or acquitted code offense at filing. In all other districts Murder 1st and 2nd degree and Man- slaughter (Codes 0100, 0200 and 0300) should be reviewed SECTION 5. OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.1.S. - 3-72 Card 2 Col. Item and if reduced at conviction code accordingly and im- mediately punch into Col. 40-43. For all others the computer transfers the offense at filing into the of- fense at termination field. 44 2. Disposition - Item I, II, or V of J.S. 3 (33) Code disposition as follows: 0 Dismissed statistically X NARA Title I & III, 28:2902 (a), (b) 1 nolled, dismissed, other Acquitted 2 By court 3 By jury (Motion for judgment of acquittal made by court or defendant, use code "2"; if motion is made by U.S. Attorney, use code "1", dismissed.) *Convicted 4 Initial plea guilty 5 Initial plea nolo contendere 6 Plea guilty, initial plea not guilty 7 Plea nolo, initial plea not guilty (When initial and last plea are made on same day, code "4" or "5" except when change of plea occurs during or after trial, then code "6" or "7", whichever code applies.) 8 By court after trial 9 By jury verdict 45 3. Counsel - Item VII of J.S. 3. Code as follows: (34) X Not reported 1 C.J.A. appointment 2 Private 3 Waived 4 Other appointment 5 None 6 Public/Community defender 46-49 4. Judge - enter judge code from Judge List (35-38) *For defendants disposed of under 21 U.S.C. 844 (b) code method of conviction as reported on JS-3. When order for expungement is received collect all JS records and have name of defendant changed to Jane or John Doe on all tape records. Collected JS cards will be returned by branch Chief for each request. OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 Col. Item 3 Sentence - Item IV of J.S. 3. (Also see Attachment 1) 50 5. Observation - code as follows: (39) O None 1 T.18:4244, 4245, 4246 (Mental incompetency) 2 T.18:5034, (F.J.D.A.) (Do not code observation if used to indicate an F.J.D.A. sentence) 3 T.18:5010 (e) (YCA and YO) 4 T.18:4208 (b), (c) 5 T.18:4252 (NARA - 30 days examination) 51 6. Sentence - code as follows: (40) 1 Sentence to imprisonment or probation a/o fine 2 Split sentence - 6 mos. imprisonment and under, with probation to follow. When imprisonment is 4 days or less ignore the imprisonment and code probation only, "1" above. 3 Mixed sentence - over 6 mos. imp. followed by probation (usually imposed on 2 or more counts or indictments) 4 DAPCA split sentence 5 Imprisonment a/o probation concurrent or con- secutive to another sentence already in effect 6 DAPCA 7 DAPCA mixed sentence 52 7. Statutory procedure - code as follows: (41) O None (regular parole, probation, fine) 1 T.18:4208 (a) (1) (minimum of less than one third and maximum sentence imposed.) 2 T.18:4208 (a) (2) (indeterminate, maximum sen- tence imposed) not to be coded on sentence of less than 1 year 3 T.18:5010 (b) (Y.C.A. indeterminate) 4 T.18:5010 (c) (Y.C.A. definite, in excess of six years) 5 F.J.D.A. (Should be coded "9" Col. 39, proceeding) T.18:4253 (a) (NARA - Indeterminate not to exceed ten years, or maximum sentence that could have been imposed) 7 T.18:4253 (b) (NARA - regular sentence. If one of the statutes 1 thru 5 is reported code accordingly) 8 DAPCA (If 1 thru 5, code accordingly) 9 NARA reopened after Title I civil commitment 53 8. Type of sentence - code as follows: (42) 0 To be deported or probation without supervision in the 5* immigration districts; sentence suspended "I.S.S."; imprisonment four days or less; time served; fine only remitted or suspended * Texas Southern (541) and Western, (542) Arizona (970) California Southern (974). and New Mexico (684). OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 Card 4 Col. Item 53 8. Continued (42) Imprisonment 1 5 days thru 12 months and 1 day 2 12 months and 2 days thru 35 months 3 36 months thru 59 months (5010 (b) always coded 3) 4 60 months and over. (5010 (c) always coded 4) Probation 5 Supervised, direct from court 6 Unsupervised (include firms and corporations); deported except in the 5 immigration districts; release to military service and probation terminates. 7 Following a term of imprisonment on split or mixed sentences; state or local sentence to imprisonment or jail; another sentence to probation (code "5" Col. 52) 8 To begin on release from military service; hos- pital or special custody. 9 Fine only, to be paid (remitted or suspended code "O"; ignore penalty or costs) 54-56 9. Term of Imprisonment in months (43-45) When type of sentence is 1, 2, 3, or 4, (Col. 53) enter, in months, the maximum term of imprisonment to be served, except as follows: 000 15 days or less (four days or less Code O Col. 53) 048 Minority, F.J.D.A. (unless time can be computed) 048 18:5010 (b), Y.C.A. 540 Life 999 999 months and over 000 Death (Code "4" Col. 53) 57-58 10. Term of probation in months (46-47) Code term of probation in months; fifteen days or less code "00"; 99 months and over code "99" OPERATIONS BRANCH D.I.S. - B-72 Card Col. 5 Item 59 11. Amount of Fine - code as follows: (48) 1 $1-99 2 $100-249 3 $250-499 4 $500-999 5 $1,000-2,499 $2,500-4,999 7 $5,000-9,999 8 $10,000-49,999 9 $50,000-and over (Fine only remitted or suspended code "0" Col. 53) Note: Unusual situations not covered by the above codes must be resolved as they occur. Special conditions are covered by card index notes. OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 Criminal Analysis J.S. 4 Presentence Coding Each quarter the termination tape is updated with dis- position and sentence information from the duplicate J.S. 3's. The termination tape is then sorted alpha by district. A C.A.J.S. 4 is punched, and a listing made, for each convicted defendant. Presentence information is coded for all convicted de- fendants for whom a Probation Form 3 or 3A is on file. Enter codes, in red, in spaces provided on the C.A.J.S. 4 card as follows (Fields on the tape record are the same as the card columns shown below): Card Col. Item 49 1. Sex 1 Male 2 Female 3 Corporation or firm Note: After all coding for the year is completed if there is no probation report, code according to name and code Col. 50-55 "xxxxxx". 50 2. Race O Corporation or firm 1 White 4 Negro 5 Indian (American) 6 Chinese 7 Japanese 8 Other X Unknown or not reported 51-52 3. Birth Year Enter last two digits of year born XX Corporation or firm; unknown or not reported OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 Card 2 Col. Item 53 4. Prior record (Use Code as reported on Probation Form 3 or 3A) 0 No known prior conviction 1 Prior conviction(s) resulting in probation only or a suspended sentence without probation (also applies to cases of fine only). 2 Prior conviction (s) resulting in sentence to 1 year or less (includes split or mixed sentences where commitment part is 1 year or less). 3 Prior commitment (s) under juvenile delinquency procedure. 4 Prior conviction (s) resulting in confinement of more than one year X Unknown or not reported 54 5. Pre-sentence investigation Thru F.Y. 1969 Beg. F.Y. 1970 1 Complete 1 Presentence 2 Partial 2 Limited 3 None 3 None X Not reported or X Not reported or unavailable unavailable 55 #6. Probation Officer recommendation 1 For probation (Fair) 2 Against probation (Poor risk) 3 None X Unavailable, or not reported * Do not code beginning fiscal year 1970. OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS DIVISION OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544 CRIMINAL TERMINATION CODES - F/Y 1972 Card (Card Columns 29-48 Precoded Card from J.S. 3) Col. J.S. 4 Coding Col. J.S. 4 Coding - Con't. 42 Type of sentence: 29-32 OFFENSE - See detailed codes 33 DISPOSITION 43-45 0 Suspended sentence, etc. Imprisonment 0 Dismissed statistically (mos) I 5 days - 12 mos and 1 day X NARA 28:2902 (a), (b) 2 12 mos and 2 days-35 mos. 1 Nolled, dism, other 3 36 mos - 59 mos 2 Acquitted by court 4 60 mos and over 3 Acquitted by jury 46-47 Probation 4 Plea guilty (mos) 5 Super direct from court 5 Plea nolo 6 Unsupervised 6 Plea guilty, initial plea N/G 7 To follow a term of impr 7 Plea nolo, initial plea N/G 8 Super on release from m/s; 8 Convicted by court hosp; local auth 9 Convicted by jury 9 Fine only 48 Amount of Fine 34 COUNSEL APPOINTED (amt) 1 $1-99 2 $100-249 X Not reported 3 $250-499 2 1 Criminal Justice Act. Appt. 4 $500-999 Private counsel 5 $1,000-2,499 3 Waived counsel 6 $2,500-4,999 4 Other appt. 7 $5,000-9,999 5 None 8 $10,000-49,999 6 Public/Community Defender 9 $50,000- and over 39-42 SENTENCE Additional C.A.J.S. 4 CODING 39 Observation: 49 SEX 0 None 1 18:4244-45 1 Male 2 Female 3 Corp 2 18:5034 - FJDA 3 18:5010 (e) YCA 50 RACE 4 18:4208 (b), (c) 5 18:4252 0 Corp 40 Sentence: 1 White 1 Impr or prob a/o fine 4 Negro 2 Impr -6 mos plus prob (split) 5 Amer Indian 3 Impr over 6 mos plus prob(mixed) 6 Chinese 4 DAPCA split sentence 7 Japanese 5 Impr a/o prob. conc/consec to 8 Other another sent. already in X Unkn/not reptd effect. 6 DAPCA-Regular sentence 51-52 BIRTH YEAR 7 DAPCA-Mixed sentence XX Corn/unkn/not rptd 41 Statutory Procedure Others-enter last two O None digits of yr 1 18:4208 (a) (1) Min.-Max. 2 18:4208 (a) (2) Indeterminate PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION 3 18:5010 (b) YCA indeterminate 4 18:5010 (c) YCA over 6 yrs. 53 Prior record ) 54 Investigation code as rpt 5 18:5034 FJDA 55 Recommendation 6 18:4253 (a) NARA Indet. X Unkn, not rptd, unavail. 7 18:4253 (b) NARA Regular sent. 8 DAPCA - Regular sentence OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 9 DAPCA -Reopened after civ. comm. Administrative Office, U. S. Courts Division of Information Systems Criminal Section Criminal Records - Card and Tape Records Filings Terminations C.A.J.S. 4 J.S. 2 and and Description tape record J.S. 3 Dup. J.S. 3 tape record District 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 Office 4 4 4 4 Docket no. 5-10 5-10 5-10 5-10 Deft. no. 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 Date filed Mo. & Cal. Yr. 13-16 13-16 Date terminated, month & Cal. Yr. 13-16 13-16 Proceeding 17 39 17 "X" to split file 17 Offense at filing 18-21 18-21 Term. R. 20 transfer "8" 18 18 Dup. deft. "X" 22 22 22 Program control 23 Date filed Mo. & F. Yr. (Tape)24-27 F. Y. Term. 24-26 Interval 27-28 Offense at term. 40-43 29-32 Disposition 44 33 Counsel 45 34 Judge 46-49 35-38 Transferring district 49-50 Observation 50 39 Sentence 51 40 Statute 52 41 Type 53 42 Term impr. 54-56 43-45 Name 56-80 Term prob. 57-58 46-47 Fine 59 48 Sex 49 Race 50 Birth year 51-52 Prior record 53 Presentence 54 P. O. recommendation 55 OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 2 Filings Terminations C.A.J.S. 4 J.S. 2 and Description and tape record J.S. 3 Dup. J.S. 3 tape record Rule 20 term. Program control 57 Transferring district 58 Name 59-60 61-80 OPERATIONS BRANCH - D.I.S. - 3-72 DIVISION OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS - OPERATIONS BRANCH CRIMINAL SECTION OSST CODES TO BE USED IN JS-3 DEFENDANT TERMINATION CODING (EFFECTIVE 12/71) Second digit "1" (sentence code) can be replaced by a "5" if sentence is consecutive or concurrent with sentence already in effect. I. Special Code 0100 - Refer to regular coding instructions II. IMPRISONMENT Impr. only 0101, 2, 3, 4 Impr. w/observation 1101, 2, 3, 4 3101, 2, 3, 4 4101, 2, 3, 4 Impr. W. statute 0112, 3, 4 0122, 3, 4 0133, 0144 Impr. after obs. with statute 1112, 3, 4 1122, 3, 4 1133 1144 3112, 3, 4 3122, 3, 4 3133 3144 4112, 3, 4 4122,3,4 Impr. with probation 0201 0301, 2, 3, 4 Impr. after obs. w/probation 1201 3201 4201 1301, 2, 3, 4 3301, 2, 3, 11 4301, 2, 3, 4 Attachment 1 a 2 - Impr. w/statute and probation 0312, 3, 4 0322,3,4 Impr. after obs. with statute & prob. 1312, 3, 4 1322, 3, If 3312, 3, 4 3322, 3, 4 4312, 3, 4 4322, 3, 4 III. PROBATION 0105 - direct. w/super. 0106 - unsupervised 0108 - after hospital, military, special custody 0507 - after state or local sent. Probation with obs. 1105 3105 4105 4106 IV. FINE 0109 V. JUVENILES Impr. 0151, 2, 3, 4 0551, 2, 3, 4 Impr. with obs. 1151, 2, 3, 4 2151, 2, 3, 4 Juv. Probation 0155 (with obs. 1155, 2155) 0557 VI. NARA 4253 (a) 5161, 2, 3, 4 D.I.S.- OPERATIONS BRANCH - 3 - 4253 (b) 5112, 3, 4 5122, 3, 4 5133 5144 5171, 2, 3, 4 5175 (Probation) Reopened after Title I or III civil commitment 5191, 2, 3, 4 5195 (Probation) VII. DAPCA (21:801 - 21:965 Special Parole) Impr. only (Code 6 (sentence code) is also used if ) (sentence is concurrent or consecutive to) 0681, 2, 3, 4 (another sentence already in effect. ) Impr. w/observation 1681, 2, 3, 4 2651, 2, 3, 4 3681, 2, 3, 4 4681,2,3,4 5681, 2, 3, 4 Impr. with stat. 0612, 3, 4 0622, 3, 4 0633 0644 Impr. after obs. w/statute 1612, 3, 4 1622, 3, 4 1633 1644 2651, 2, 3, 4 3612,3,4 3622, 3, 4 3633 3644 4612, 3, 4 4622, 3, 4 5612, 3, 4 5622, 3, 4 5633 5644 - 4 as Impr. with probation 0491 (Split Sentence) 0781, 2, 3, 4 (Mixed Sentence) Impr. after obs. w/Probation 1401 2401 3401 4401 1781, 2, 3, 4 2751, 2, 3, 4 3781, 2, 3, 4 4781, 2, 3, 4 5401 5781, 2, 3, 4 Impr. with statute and probation 0712, 3, 4 0722, 3, 4 Impr. after obs. w/statute & probation 1712, 3, 4 1722, 3, 4 2752, 3, 4 3712, 3, 4 3722, 3, 4 4712, 3, 4 4722, 3, 4 5712,3,4 5722, 3, 4 Probation only 0655 Juvenile 0685 Direct from Court 0686 Probation with obs. 1685 2655 3685 4685 5685 Do not code the time under special parole. This coding scheme allows that there is a special parole period for these cases that is not shown in our codes. OSST -- observation, sentence, statutory procedure, type OBS. - observation NARA ** Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act 1966 DAPCA- Drug Abuse Prevention Control Act 1970 Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to these materials. GR Press Photo by JOHN R. FULTON JR. Dr. Duncan Littlefair, An Unexpected Defender But One Smiled know better than we who've had him under a microscope for 25 years, that Jerry is a moral man." Editor's Note: An Sunday, Sept. 15, Dr. doesn't undermine the legal system, rather Duncan Littlefair preached a sermon at fulfills it, because the power of pardon, like Fountain Street Church in which he strongly veto, is a perfectly rightful special defended Prsident Ford's pardon of former privilege of Presidents; justice was done President Nixon as proper forgiveness. This because proper punishment for an erring week, he discussed those ideas with The President was achieved by Nixon's depar- Press. ture from office and admission of guilt by By Scott Scholten accepting the pardon; the pardon was for the office, not the man, and punishment of When Dr. Duncan Littlefair began his the man would have punished the office forgiveness-clad defense of President (the two are inseparably linked for life, he Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon, he raised said) and, in effect, all of us that it a few eyebrows in the pews at Fountain represents; and, the President is more than Street Church. an ordinary citizen, elevated by the honor When he finished, he drew a round of of his office to a special place under, not spontaneous applause. above the law. the Special Prosecutors Although the copy of a my memorandum from Henry Ruth him to me dated September 3, 1974 "Subject: Mr. Nixon" was Mr. Dawors ki d vised me that fI were vre sent to you in confidence, n if you are willing to assume the he would responsibility for its release, I shall raise no objection to year my doing so. Mr. Dawrski said he In the event of its release, we A would expect, of course, that it be made available in its entirety, including the first and last paragraphs of the memorandum, FORD is LIBRARY CERALD Ford Reported Rejecting Haig's Pardon Bid United Press International Former White : House chief of staff Alexander M. Haig Jr. approached President Ford nine days before the Nixon presidency ended about a post QUESTIONS 1. Immunity for Nixon President: Helen. 5. Pardon Is an Option Mr. President, aside from the Spe- Q. Mr. President, may I just follow up cial Prosecutor's role, do you agree with on Helen's question. Are you saying sir the-bar bar association that the law applies that the option of a pardon for former equally to all men, or do you agree President Nixon is still an option that with Governor Rockefeller that former you will consider depending on what President Nixon should have immunity the courts will do? I believe that Governor Rockefeller will take over my responsibilities head- 15. Questions on Nixon ing the subcommittee of the Domestic Q. Mr. President, have there been Council on Privacy. Governor Rockefel- any communications between the spe- with his vast experience in foreign cial prosecutor's office and anyone on ler make a significant contribu- your staff regarding President Nixon? JimBerry 4 © 1974 by NEA Inc "I'm afraid someone else will have to grant you a pardon for playing hooky from school and ripping your shirt!" 'Hypothetical' Pardon Query Reported Gerald R. Ford while serv- then-President Nixon if Mr. committee on questions sur- ing, no deal between me and ing as Vice President, was Nixon resigned from office, rounding the pardon of the the former President, nor be. asked a "hydothetical" ques- former President and it would tween my staff and the staff NBC News reported last night. of the former President, none tion whether he would pardon The White House declined be inappropriate to comment whatever." direct comment on the report. on any matters regarding his -In the same news confer- NBC quoted sources as say- testimony at this time." ence, Mr. Ford was reminded Mr Ford announced his that he was asked during the The case of the former President grossly divided our nation. Further, it has diverted our attention from the search for effective solutions to many complex prob lems which we face today. President Ford acted decisively out of an overriding concern that a prolonged prosecution of Richard Nixon would delay the start of this vital search. I would like to add, that the power to grant a pardon is the President's exclusive right under the Constitution. The exercise of this power is an act of high mercy designed by our nation's founders, to temper justice. LAW WEEKLY Gerald Ford In his quest for "justice and mercy" Gerald R. Ford lost sight of the real meaning of the authority vested in him to forgive transgressions against the sovereign. The Vietnam era "deserters" and "draft evaders" are destined to become the vic- tims of his most questionable exercise of his presidential power to date. Presidential Proclamation No. 4313 summoned up the totality of the constitutional authority vested in him by Article II to establish guilt, virtually eliminate prosecutorial discretion, legislate punishment and erect a monument to unequal protection. In the guise of "earned re-entry", guilt by proclamation is not only established, but elevated to the level of desertion in time of war (a capital offense even in "undeclared" wars) and willful evasion of the draft. The extent of the President's overstatement of the case is clear when one considers that during the last decade fewer than ten per cent of persons administra- tively classified as "deserters" by the military have been prosecuted under Article 85 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. In fact, Department of Defense data through 1973 con- cerning those known to have been absent in foreign countries confirm that in nearly half the cases (forty-four per cent) the military decided not. to prosecute for even the lesser offense of "absence without proper authority" under Article 86 of the page 2 Uniform Code. These figures are significant because while de- sertion involves a substantial burden of proof with respect to intent to remain away permanently, unauthorized absence is so easily proven that not-guilty pleas border on the ludicrous. The civilian scene offers only slightly more support to the President's case. No matter whose count one accepts, less than twenty-five per cent of those believed to be in "exile" as civil- ians are currently under indictment. Of the nearly 3,500 cases completed in 1973, conviction for any Selective Service viola- tion was obtained in only twenty-eight per cent of the total. The foregoing Department of Defense and Justice statistics from a recent pre-proclamation survey of the problem by Alfred B. Fitt writing in the New York Times Magazine on September 8, 1974 would seem to invite a broadening, rather than the question- able legal tactic of narrowing prosecutorial discretion. Under the Ford plan the prosecutor's office is little more than a way station en route to a Selective Service Office. The President's clear command that some alternative service will be required is a significant departure from what has been long recognized as the prosecutor's duty and obligation to weigh each prospective action in light of both the individual's circumstances and the public interest. The independent prosecutor, though a member of the Executive Branch, has traditionally been a significant point of discretion in our common law system, even against GERALD hostile or "runaway" grand juries. While the Proclamation's page 3 restraints upon that discretion do not rise to the level of the Saturday Night Massacre, they are nonetheless unfortunate prece- dents. Perhaps the graveman of the mistake in the President's edict lies not in what it did but in what it did not do. It did not grant or promise amnesty. It did not grant or promise pardons. Utilization of the Proclamation vehicle without even reference to these terms provided the first hint that a stranger to the constitutionalscene was about to emerge. Avoidance of the clear Presidential power of pardon in favor of some amorphous concept labeled "reconciliation" dangerously exceeded the authority conferred by Article II, Section 2, and no amount of summoning of the penumbra of remaining presidential powers conferred by Article II changed that fact. It is no mere coincidence that both the Lincoln and Truman precedents cited the pardon power as authority. Lincoln dealt with Confederate rebels as a group and therefore labeled his action as both "pardon and amnesty," while Truman's "Amnesty Board" made recommendation on a case-by-case basis and the 1,523 persons receiving favorable treatment were granted individual "pardons." Presidents Jefferson, Madison and Jackson each granted "full pardons" or "full and free pardons" to military personnel accused or convicted of desertion. Pardons and amnesty were frequently granted conditionally page 4 or with groups of persons excepted from the beneficiary category. Jefferson's offer required surrender within four months. Jackson's plan returned imprisoned soldiers to duty and barred those at large from serving again. The Lincoln amnesty excepted officers of the Confederate government and turncoat United States officers. But none of the aforementioned conditions or exceptions was even remotely comparable to the anti-pardon position reflected by Mr. Ford's offer of mere prosecutorial amnesia coupled with a requirement for "alternative service." The problem with alternative service, especially where no criminal sentence has been adjudicated, is that it is in reality an alternative punishment. While the law clearly allows alter- native service for a limited category of persons classified as "conscientious objectors" prior to induction, to hold it out as an alternative to a legislatively enacted criminal sanction is not only without precedent, but is a clear invasion of the legislative prerogative to establish penalties for violation of societal norms or legislative mandates. To contend that the President may unilaterally change the nature of punishment for a criminal act, as opposed to eliminating or reducing such punishment by the exercise of his pardon authority, is to read Article II as vesting in the President powers specifically re- served to the Congress in Article I. page 5 Even the much-discussed plea bargaining situation is not analogous because it involves merely a reduction in the quantum, not nature, of permissible punishments -- and judicial concurrence is required. But one need not resort to theory -- although a President can ill afford the luxury of dismissing it -- to see the in- equities inherent in the present scheme. A citizen with his eye upon the mythical maximums authorized by law is likely to be grossly deceived by the Ford deal of two years alternative service. The previously cited Justice and Defense data also revealed that only seven per cent of the civilian evaders con- victed in 1973 were imprisoned. And further, that of the per- sons convicted by military courts, forty per cent served no time, forty-one per cent were sentenced to six months or less, and less than five per cent were sentenced to more than one year. Any attempt to rationalize the potential for longer periods of involuntary servitude under the Ford scheme by pointing to the stigma of conviction in a minority of the cases must be weighed against the problems arising from the uneviable circum- stance of being accused but never excused by the state. But even constitutional transgressions may be viewed less harshly if they achieve a desirable social end and offer "justice" in the process. Mr. Ford's Proclamation serves neither of these page 6 objectives. First, to the extent that requiring the individual citizen's to a legislative mandate authorizing conscript armies is a prerogative of the Soveriegn worthy of preservation, the Proclamation carries a powerful message. If this precedent is valid, one who has doubts about his desire to serve should run, go underground, lie or cheat, but under no circumstances should he put on a uniform. Those who did not serve will not be pardoned, but they will in many cases escape the civil burdens attaching to convicted criminals in our society. Those who underwent a change of heart or conscience while in the military are clearly less fortunate. Not only is there no pardon, the "deserter" returns to his civil- ian community with a discharge certificate which clearly labels him as Undersirable. After completion of alternative service, the vietnam era "deserter" may request a "Clemency Discharge" in lieu of his Undesirable Discharge certificate. No one really knows what a Clemency Discharge is except that it carries with it the same disabilities as an Undesirable Discharge certificate. It also deprives the holder of any veterans' benefits regardless of the length of good military or alternative service and it connotes service under "other than honorable conditions." In fact, be- cause Undesirable Discharges may be grounded upon varying indi- cators of "unfitness for service" ranging from shirking of duties to failure to pay just debts, there is a clear and present danger page 7 that the discharge which readily identifies one as a war resister is an additional detriment. Standing alone this difference in treatment for essentially the same offense is egregious enough. But the extent of the tragedy is even more apparent when one looks at the social pro- files of the two groups. Evader profiles are largely unscientific, but most evidence points to a middle class upbringing, some college, and average or better intelligence. By way of contrast, the Department of Defense advises that the "deserter" profiles reflects a high school drop-out of less-than-average intelligence who probably raised his social standing by entering the armed forces. Even under "reconciliation," those persons who were least able to "fight the system", pay the higher price. One can only hope that Presidential Proclamation No. 4313 will prove to be a trial balloon -- a bad idea which will be withdrawn or "modified" to the inoperative point. One has a right to expect that a President trained at the Bar should appreciate our constitutional scheme, the value of precedent, and the rule of law at least as well as a haberdasher named Harry. 1. Pre-quertment issue P, Lock of specificity 2) Time & relationship or transactional b) Description atracts c) Stitutory citation 3. Acceptance 4. Conditions, fany to bo offective only on his satis factorily - agreements re dofonso of suits Vs, Nixon in his capacityas Pres greeing to contro ned disposition of popers 5. Immunity effects oras.individual or (?) panst grinst this Pres - sny as poct of case that bears on RNs pers. liability b. Pro-rond itiorks a) Self-stoted bill at porticulare ot circumstances that argyably be grounds b) Controlled disposition of papers forfederal assume obligation te respond to criminal c) wasubjooms q/in default U.S Gov't prosecution employees optile gd to follow Court-imposoddirpitions I also reserve 7. If some specificity desired sources could be right to protect 2) RN' own statem top Not Sec, on what b) Jaworski IS 601ng togroduct. c) House Judiciary Committee report DERALO FORD ANSWERS TO THE BASIC QUESTIONS ON THE NIXON PARDON The harsh reaction to the Nixon pardon generally works back to three questions on people's minds: Was there a deal? Is this a coverup? Is this Equal Justice? A little logic and perspective can answer these questions. The Deal issue can be answered with simple logic. The notion of a prior deal is inherently illogical? How would Nixon enforce such a deal? What sanction could he use if it were broken? If Ford were so devious and dishonest and oppor- tunistic to make such a deal in the first place, he would have been sufficiently devious and dishonest and opportunistic to disregard it afterward, when a pardon was clearly not in Ford's personal best interest. The Coverup issue must be considered first with a little perspective. Watergate and related offenses have already been investigated and prosecuted with an effort all out of propor- tion to the normal standards of American criminal justice. An estimated $10,000,000 has already been spent on Watergate and related investigation and prosecution. That is more than the total combined prosecution budgets of Cincinnati plus Cleve- land plus Dallas plus Fort Worth plus Miami plus Milwaukee plus Minneapolis plus New Orleans plus Pittsburgh plus St. Paul!! The kind of evidence that was available, moreover, taped con- versations, was far superior to the evidence normally available. That $10,000,000 of total effort was necessary because of the political implications of Watergate. But in terms of normal standards of American criminal justice, it was extrava- gant. But investigation and prosecution did not end there. Nixon is still under subpoena. Without the pardon he might take the Fifth Amendment. Now he cannot withhold tapes or testimony without becoming liable to prosecution for perjury. Far from covering up anything, the pardon has facilitated full exposure, regarding Watergate itself. The non-Watergate charges must be considered further with some perspective. Tax fraud, ITT, the Milk Fund et al. were all investigated far more thoroughly than would normally -2- be expected. The evidence on them was presented to the House Judiciary Committee, a body far more competent and high-powered than any grand jury. Members of that committee were looking for all possible specific criminal acts, in order to strengthen their case. They could find only one, obstruction of justice on the Watergate case. The other charges, they concluded, did not offer a basis for criminal prosecution. The Equal Justice issue, whether the pardon of Nixon sets a standard of leniency for the rich and well-connected differ- ent from the normal standard of American criminal justice, must also be considered with perspective. First, the Watergate breakin would have been handled as a simple burglary before the Nixon Administration, if it had been without political implications. Under the general prose- cution policy in the District of Columbia, the defendents in such a breakin, being without criminal weapons and criminal re- cords, would have gotten First Offender Treatment, no jail sen- tences. There would have been no conspiracy The Nixon Administration, however, started enforcement of the Federal Wiretap Act, making wiretapping a Federal offense. So the case was transfered to Federal Court. Over 80% of those convicted in wiretap cases get sen- tences of one year or less; 10-20% get probation. Nixon was accused by the first article of Impeachment of Obstruction of Justice. In FY 1974 there were 42 Federal convictions on this charge. The cases generally involved threats against witnesses. 45% of the defendents convicted, however, got probation, and that included the bulk of those without previous criminal records who did not threaten violence against witnesses! Thus, Nixon was pardoned for a crime for which, under nor- mal standards of American criminal justice, he would probably never have gone to jail. He was pardoned after having gone through an experience far more rigorous and painful than a nor- mal criminal trial. Mountains of evidence had been considered by a tribunal of 35 outstanding lawyers, under intense world- wide publicity. Nixon himself did not appear on the witness stand, to be sure, but instead he had the far more humiliating experience of publication of tapes of his conversations about his worst problems. In terms of loss of mobility, income, and dignity, he had already been punished far more than the average defendent faced with similar charges. WITHDRAWAL SHEET (PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES) FORM OF CORRESPONDENTS OR TITLE DATE RESTRICTION DOCUMENT List Defendants Disposed of in Fiscal Year 1974 in United States District 10/9/1974 C Courts Who Had Been Charged with Intimidation of Witnesses, Jurors, Etc. 18 USC 1503-5 File Location: Philip Buchen Files, Box 32, folder "Nixon Pardon - General (1)" RESTRICTION CODES (A) Closed by applicable Executive order governing access to national security information. (B) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the document. (C) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in the donor's deed of gift. EMD 9/4/2014 NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION NA FORM 1429 (1-98) 1. Equal Treatment for Watergate Defendants 2. Pardoning Watergate Defendants; "The Study" 3. Background: Usual Clemency Procedure 4. Outside Clemency Review 5. Getting the Facts Out 6. Knowing What Was Pardoned; Pardon Scope 7. Timing 8. Integrity of the Law 9. Judicial Determination of Standards 10. Your Credibility 11. Change of Mind; Public Reaction; Agony Intensified 12. Nixon Health; Prepare the Public 13. "Deal" 1. EQUAL TREATMENT FOR WATERGATE DEFENDANTS (See also "Integrity of the Law" at page 8) QUESTION: Is it an unjust denial of equal treatment to refuse to pardon the Watergate defendants? ANSWER: The situation of former President Nixon is very different from that of the Watergate defendants, especially those awaiting trial. / The Nixon situation is unique. 1. Previous Official Determination. Richard Nixon has already been found unanimously by the House Judiciary Committee to have engaged in substantial misbehavior. 2. Punishment Already Suffered. To resign from the Presidency is a disgrace in history and in the eyes of the people. To be raised to this office, especially by a landslide vote, is to be honored extraordinarily. To leave it under the circumstances in which Richard Nixon did, is to be punished more than any other American leader has. To be sure, there is punishment in any fall from grace, but the depth of Richard Nixon's fall is unique. 3. Public Contribution. In dispensing mercy we should look not only to a man's transgressions but also to his contributions to the public welfare. There may not be unanimous acclaim for Richard Nixon's policies, but perhaps even his severest critics admit that some of his policies advanced the public interest and contributed to world peace. Such contributions are a matter of degree, but Richard Nixon's situation is unique. 4. Public Distress or Polarization. Many Americans would be distressed over the indictment and the appearance "in the dock" of a former President. / Because, moreover, a substantial number of Americans would feel strongly alienated from any such proceedings, the possibility of political polarization is real. The cumulative effect is to make Richard Nixon's situation unique. Perhaps some or many will disagree, but perhaps most Americans can understand why I think the Nixon case is different. ALTERNATIVE QUESTION: Since all the others were involved in the same crime, ostensibly at the behest of their pardoned leader, how can you justify trying them now? ANSWER: We cannot know whether the facts about the role of these other defendants are as you state them until there is a trial. When the facts become known, they can be taken into account in the usual way after trial in sentencing and in normal clemency procedures. Those who occupy a position of public trust in the service of a President are morally responsible for their own actions. / and / on the following page -1- Footnotes from 1. * You might be asked about the Watergate defendants' suggestion that an 1856 Supreme Court case implies that a pardon for one is a pardon for all. You should not comment on a defendant's legal argument to the court. ** / Some might think that such distress would reflect an excessive and unwise mystique surrounding Presidents and former Presidents, but it seems to be a fact. GERAL BRARY -la- 2. PARDONING WATERGATE DEFENDANTS: "THE STUDY" QUESTION: Will you now pardon the Watergate defendants facing trial? ANSWER: The normal processes of justice will be followed. FOLLOWUP QUESTION: Does that mean you have decided against any future clemency for (a) those already convicted who have either completed or are now serving their sentences, or (b) those who may be convicted in the future? ANSWER: The only thing I have decided is that the usual processes should be followed. If I point out that those normal processes include published regulations on Presidential clemency, please do not infer that I am contemplating future clemency. QUESTION: You said that pardon for Dean and other Watergate defendants is being considered. Did you consider blanket pardoning? If not, what was being studied? Is the study complete? What is the result? ANSWER: 1. I never contemplated blanket pardons and certainly no general pretrial clemency. 2. The Nixon case is unique. (See elaborated answer on this point.) 3. I did want an' examination of proper procedures for processing any clemency petitions that are in fact received. 4. The proper procedure is that any convicted person may apply through the Department of Justice in the usual manmer. GERAL -2- 3. BACKGROUND: USUAL CLEMENCY PROCEDURE Under published regulations, after conviction and sentencing one ordinarily applies for Executive Clemency through the Department of Justice. Upon receipt of the petition, the Attorney General uses the Office of the Pardon Attorney and reviews the request, conducts whatever investigation is necessary, and then forwards recommendations to the White House. Before petitioning for a pardon, one who has been imprisoned must ordinarily, under existing regulations, wait three years -- or five in certain cases * / -- after his release. (Nothing prevents the Attorney General from making appropriate adjustments in this requirement or from amending his regulations generally.) There is no fixed waiting period for requests for the commutation of a sentence. (Commutation is usually granted only when other relief is not available from a court or parole board, but exceptions are provided for in the regulations. ) The President does not ordinarily review personally each clemency recommendation from the Justice Department. There are too many of them. Under past practice ** / Justice Department recommendations were reviewed by White House counsel who could forward them for personal Presidential attention where ,necessary. / Such as perjury or the violation of a public trust involving personal dishonesty. **/ We do not necessarily want to commit ourselves to preserving this practice. -3- - 4. OUTSIDE CLEMENCY REVIEW QUESTION: Would it not be better to have the Special Prosecutor's Office or independent advisors outside of the government make recommendations relating to clemency petitions from Watergate defendants? ANSWER: 1. The Office of the Pardon Attorney was established to process petitions for clemency so that the individuals who prosecute an individual are not the same ones deciding whether he should get clemency. The prosecutorial role of the Special Prosecutor could be inconsistent with the role of evaluating a petition for clemency. 2. Processing petitions for clemency is not a part of the responsibility of the Special Prosecutor as set forth in the regulations for the Department of Justice. 3. Although outside review by persons outside of the government does have certain advantages, there should be a presumption in favor of regular procedures. And I have no reason to believe that this function is not best performed by those persons who do it on a regular basis. They do, incidentally, in the process of preparing their recommendations, solicit the opinion of the prosecutor and make appropriate additional inquiries. 4. Note: As to any fear that the Pardon Attorney (who was appointed during the Nixon administration) might be too lenient with regard to Nixon administration officials involved in Watergate: I have no reason to think so. The Attorney General will, of course, take appropriate steps to insure impartial consideration. Furthermore, Justice Department recommendations will be reviewed in the White House. 5. Note: As to any fear that the usual standards for Justice Department clemency recommendations are too restrictive or too harsh: I am confident that the Justice Department administers its clemency responsibility conscientiously and if any change in its procedures or standards are warranted, I am sure that the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General will consider them. -4- 5. GETTING THE FACTS OUT QUESTION: Does the pardon mean that the people and the history will never know the full facts about Richard Nixon's possible crimes or other misbehavior in office? / Is the pardon another coverup? ANSWER: 1. The American people already know a great deal about the Nixon Presidency. 2. The House Judiciary Committee has published its official findings on Richard Nixon's behavior in office. 3. The pardon does not itself preclude any report on all matters within the Special Prosecutor's jurisdiction, at a time and in a manner consistent with his responsibilities. (a) The Special Prosecutor alr eady has the materials related to the Watergate coverup. (b) Any other needed information may well be available in connection with other proceedings and, wherever Mr. Nixon himself is a witness, the pardon prevents any Fifth Amendment claim to silence based on the possibility of incrimination under Federal law. (c) It is possible that other arrangements for access to the Nixon files might be worked out. I myself have long urged and will continue to urge full disclosure by Mr. Nixon. * / Another form for this question: Do you agree with former Special Prosecutor Cox that "the guilt or innocence of a high official charged with crime, especially a President, should be determined once and for all by the established procedures of justice in order to lay to rest claims of political vendetta. To short circuit the process invites endless uncertainty and division. " -5- 6. KNOWING WHAT WAS PARDONED: PARDON SCOPE QUESTION: Was it wise to pardon Richard Nixon without knowing what, if any, offenses he might have committed? ANSWER: The Watergate coverup charges are pretty well known and I did have information from the Special Prosecutor's office that not even probable criminal guilt could be established with respect to an additional 10 specified allegations concerning Mr. Nixon. FOLLOWUP QUESTION: Does that mean that evidence of crime in these or any other now-unspecified matters might not turn up in the future? ANSWER: One can never be certain what will appear in the future. */ QUESTION: A pardon for Watergate can be understood to serve a national purpose, but why a pardon that covers possible tax fraud as well? Wouldn't the nation be better served by a demonstration that even a President cannot cheat on his taxes? ANSWER: What really mattered was Watergate and the resulting harassment of the former President. Anything less than a full pardon would have left open the door to continued attacks and would have defeated my purpose which is to put this whole affair behind us. / Note: This is a very troublesome point. It would be unwise to make any predictions or estimates that additional and significant improprieties might not yet appear. -6- 7. TIMING QUESTION: Why did you grant the pardon when you did? Wouldn't it have been better to wait (1) until indictment, if any, and trial of Nixon, (2) until wider consultation with Congress and the public, or (3) until the jury in the Watergate trials is sequestered? ANSWER: 1. Once I had decided that Mr. Nixon should, as an act of mercy, be spared any imprisonment, there seemed to be no reason to open him and the American people to the distress of a trial. / Under these circumstances, a trial seemed unnecessarily harassing and vindictive toward him and pardon NOTE: See separate answers on -- getting the facts out -- getting a judicial determination of standards what was pardoned 2. More consultation might have been preferable, / but I never doubted the wide diversity of views on this subject. Consensus did not seem possible. 3. Some may think that a pardon for Nixon before the jury is sequestered in the Watergate trials might possibly be thought prejudicial to the defendants, but that is a matter for the courts to decide. Accordingly, further comment on this point by me seems inappropriate. * /Does not explain failure to wait for an indictment. / The Attorney General might appropriately have been consulted about both substance or form, but you had advice of counsel and based your judgment on your own fundamental conception of mercy and on broad considerations of the national interest. -7- 8. INTEGRITY OF THE LAW QUESTION: Doesn't the pardon mean that significant personages violate the law with impugnity while the more humble suffer the law's full rigors? / ANSWER: This concern is understandable but 1. All persons -- Presidents included -- are subject to the law. And I believe that the law has triumphed in Watergate. It has routed out and put a stop to the Watergate wrongs. 2. In a very real sense the nation has rendered a verdict on Richard Nixon. 3. Clemency is also a part of our system of law. To pardon is to forgive and not to excuse the conduct that may have been involved. 4. It is a unique act of mercy for a man (a) whose conduct has already been found unacceptable but (b) who has already suffered greatly (c) who has surely contributed to the public interest in some respects, and (d) whose trial would have distressed many of the public. 5. The whole Watergate situation is unique. ALTERNATIVE QUESTION: Is this pardon a precedent that no President should ever be tried for his possible crimes? GERAL -8- 9. JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF STANDARDS QUESTION: Doesn't the pardon mean that the courts will never have the occasion to define appropriate standards of conduct for Richard Nixon and other Presidents? ANSWER: 1. The courts are not the exclusive instititution by which gover nmental standards of conducted are determined. * / 2. The courts may have occasion to consider such standards in other cases. 3. The House Judiciary Committee has already made historically significant determinations of this sort. 4. The proper standards of behavior seem quite clear with respect to most Watergate related matters. / * / Constitutional history and other institutions have a very major role in this process. ** / Whether this is true with respect to the ten other matters of the Special Prosecution Force, most cannot be fully known at this stage. -9- 10. YOUR CREDIBILITY QUESTION: What do you plan to do to restore your credibility and regain the trust of the American people? ANSWER: I hope that my credibility is not lost. The country knows that contro- versial decisions are not always popular. And I have changed my mind on this question. But I hope that even those who disagree with my decision understand that every statement I have made on this subject represented my genuine thinking at the time. Candor is the basis of trust, as I intend to go on speaking sincerely, even when I change my mind. GERALD LIBRARY -10- 11. CHANGE OF MIND: PUBLIC REACTION: AGONY INTENSIFIED QUESTION: Do you now believe that you were correct at your last press conference when you said a pardon now would be unwise and untimely? ANSWER: As I have said, I reconsidered my earlier judgment and came to believe that a pardon was a proper act of mercy that best serves the interests of the nation. I fully understand that it would have been better for me politically to have stayed with my earlier position, but that is not my criterion. QUESTION: Did you consider or suspect the public reaction that actually occurred to your pardon of former President Nixon? ANSWFR: I knew there would be great concern. I did not try to predict its extent, because I believed and still believe that the grant of mercy was the right thing for me to do. QUESTION: Hasn't the pardon intensified national agony as much as a trial of the former President would have? ANSWER: Although the matter is not capable of clear proof either way, I believe that the adverse national consequences of a Nixon trial and possible additional punishment would have been much greater. -11- 12. NIXON HEALTH: PREPARE THE PUBLIC QUESTION: Was the timing dictated by what you viewed as a health emergency? ANSWER: As I said in my speech, the former President's health was a factor, but not in the sense of an emergency. My concern is for the very long time needed to start and complete a trial, and once the decision was made, the sooner the better. FOLLOWUP QUESTION: If not, why did you not do S omething to prepare the American public for your reversal instead of acting precipitously? ANSWER: In a matter this controversial there is not much that can be done to "prepare" the public as you put it. All I could do was to explain my reasoning openly and candidly, which I did. BERNER -12- 13. "DEAL" QUESTION: The concern has been expressed here and there that the pardon arose from some "deal. 11 ANSWER: There was no deal. Had there been any such deal I would not have indicated at my last press conference that indictment and other legal process should probably precede a pardon. QUESTION: Is it true, as reported in the press, that Haig and Kissinger conveyed Nixon's desire for a pardon to you indirectly before he resigned? Did you indicate to him in any way that you would grant a pardon? ANSWER: QUESTION: When did you decide to pardon the former President? ANSWER: -13-

nara / coll_grf-0019 / doc

Nixon Pardon - General (1)

ID: 4520694
Type: document

Citation Image

Metadata

id	4520694
sourceUrl	https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4520694
contentType	document
collections	Philip W. Buchen Files Philip Buchen's General Subject Files
subjects	Nixon, Richard M. (Richard Milhous), 1913-1994 Presidential campaign, 1976 Law and legislation
iiifBase	https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0019/574067/Batch0002/38-0019-f-4520694.pdf
thumbnailUrl	https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0019/574067/Batch0002/38-0019-f-4520694.pdf
largeImageUrl	https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0019/574067/Batch0002/38-0019-f-4520694.pdf
imageCount	1
hasImages	yes
source	import

Additional Source Fields

url	https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4520694
naId	4520694
coverageEndDate	logicalDate 1976-08-01 month 8 year 1976
coverageStartDate	logicalDate 1974-08-01 month 8 year 1974
itemCount	1
levelOfDescription	fileUnit
recordType	description
ocrSource	nara-archive

Pages

Page 1 OCR

Survos folio item chat

Ask the Scholar

Scholar Source Context