ML20099J875
| ML20099J875 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/14/1992 |
| From: | Edgar G NEWMAN & HOLTZINGER, TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#392-13174 CPA, NUDOCS 9208240073 | |
| Download: ML20099J875 (89) | |
Text
m .
3 .. }
, {'ut r i i1.0 UM i '
August 14, 1 2 92 A% 17 A10:17 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REQULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND '?! M M f 'M I h /
LICENSING BOARD k'c) #
)
In the Matter of )
)
TEKAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC ) Docket No. 50-446 -db/09 COMPANY ) Construction Permit
) Amendment (Comanche Peak Steam Electric )
Station, Unit 2) )
)
TU ELECTRIC'S ANSWER TO THE PETITION FOR INTERVENTION AND REQUEST FOR HEARINGS BY_THE DOWS On February 3, 1992, Texas Utilities Electric Company ("TU Electric") requested that +ne U.S. Nuclear ROgulatory Commission
("NRC") amend Construction Permit Nc. CPPR-127 such that the latest date for completing construction of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station ("CPSES") Unit 2 would be extended-from August 1, 1992 to August 1, 1995. The NRC Staff completed an E:mironmental Assessment of the request and issued a Finding of 3G Significant Impact on June 23, 1992. 57 Fed. Reg. 28,885
.(1992). On July 28, 1992, the NRC issued an " Order Extending the Latest Construction Completion Date" for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Unit 2. Under date of July 28, 1992, Sandra Long Dow dba Disposable Workers of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Etation, and R. Micky Dow (the " Dows" and "DWCPSES" pr
" Petitioners") filed a " Petition for Intervention and Request for 9208240073 920814 y$2 PDR ADOCK 05000446 G PDR
r i --.
.idarings" (" Petition") regarding TU Electric's request.
TU Slectric hereby files its response in opposition to the Petition and-asks that_the request for leave to. intervene be summarily denied. As is fully' discussed below, the Petition should not be accepted for filing because it contains false, scandalous, and unsupportable' accusations. Furthermore, the Petition does not establish standing for either the Dows or DWCPSES. Finally, the Petition does not specifically identify the aspects of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which Petitioners wish to intervene.-
I. 'The Petition Should Not Be Aceggted for Filing The Petition is not the first pleading filed by the Dows
- regarding Comanche Peak. During the last year, the Dows have ;
initiated more than~a dozen actions related te Comanche Peak, ,
including the followings o : A -" Motion to Beopen the Record" (Nov. 20, 1991) in the operating license (OL) proceeding for Comanche Feak
-Units 1 and-2'and the-construction permit amendment
.(CPA) proceeding for Comanche Peak Unit 1, which was
-denied by;the Commission in CLI-92-01, 35 NRC 1 (1992).
o- Av" Petition for Leave to Intervene Out of Time" (Feb.
20,_1992) and " Motion to. Reopen the Record" (Feb. 21, 1992) in the OL and CPA proceedings for Comanche Peak,
(,
t
. which were denied by the Commission on August 12, 1992 in CLI-92-12, 36 NRC , (1992).
o A " Request to Instituto Proceedings to Modify, Suspend or Revoke the License Held by Texas Utilities Electric Company for Unit 1 of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station" (May 19, 1992), which is still pending before the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
o Eleven petitions before the U.S. district courta and courts of appeal against TU Electric, the NRC, and other parties. Most of these petitions have been dismissed, and the Dows have not prevailed in any of ,
the cases.u 1/ Egg Dow v. NRC, Docket No. 92-1348, " Original Petition for Temporary Reetraining Order and Original Petition for Preliminary Injunction" and " Petition for Review of Administrative Order" (D.C. Cir, filed Aug. 6, 1992); Dow v.
HRC, Docket No._ 92-1224 (D.C. Cir. filed May 21, 1992);
United States v. Comley, Docket No. 92-1319, Slip op. (1st
'Cir. Apr. 10, 1992)(denying Micky Dow's-petition to intervene); Dow v. NRC, Docket No. 92-1069, Slip op. (D.C.
Cir. May 7, 1992)(denying the Dovs' request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, and further requiring the Dows to show cause why the Commission's decision in CLI-92-01 should not be summarily affirmed); Dnx
- v. NRC, Docket Nos. 91-1461 and 1462, Slip op. (D.C. Cir.
Jan. 30, 1992)(dismissing the Dows' petitions for review);
In re Dog, Docket Nos. 91-1451 and 91-1444, Slip-op. (5th Cir. May. 7, 9, 1991)(denying Dows' petitions for injunction pending appeal and for writ of mandamus); Dow v. Texas Utilities Electric Co., Docket No. 91-1238, Slip op. (W.D.
Pa.: June 23, 1992)(dismissir. j the Dows' petition); Dow v.
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Docket No. CA4-91-255-E, Slip op. (N.D. Tex. Apr. 11, 1991)(dismissing Mr. Dow's petition for injunction). '
i i
. In addition, Mr. Dow refused to comply with a subpoena issued by the NRC. The NRC eventually decided to withdraw this' subpoena because it concluded that "there was no reasonable basis to believe that [he is) in possession of information-indicative of safety concerns regarding the Comanche Peak facility."U As discussed in detail in a previous response by TU Electric,U the Dows have engaged in a pattern of not complying with the Commission's requirements, of making frivolous and scurrilous claims, of making statements which the Dows knew or should have known omit material facts, and of harassing TU Ele'ctric and the NRC. Given this pattern of behavior, TU Electric requested the Commission to admonish the Dows and not to accept any further pleading from the Dows unless the Commission affirmatively determines that the pleading facially complies with 4
the Commission's requirements, reflects a good faith effort to ..
- confirm the validity of the factual and legal allegations contained therein, and otherwise appears to be free of the types of. defects summarized above.M This request is still pending before the Commission.U 2/ Eng letter dated Nov. 20, 1991, from Chairman Ivan-Selin to Richard E. Dow at 1.
3/ "TU Electric's Answer to the Petition to Intervene and Motion and Supplemental Motion to Reopen by Micky Dow and Sandra Long Dow and TU Electric's Request for Admonition of the Dows" (Mar. 16, 1992) at 22-36.
A/ Idm 5/ By Memorandum and Order dated August 12, 1992, the Commission denied the Dows' petition for late ihtervention (filed Feb. 20, 1992) and motion to reopen the record (filed
. . - . _ _ _ _ . __ - ~ . _ _ _ .
The instant Petition by the Dows suffers from.the same types of defects discussed in TU Electric's request for admonition. In particular, as discussed in Section III below, the Petition does not even facially address one of the Commission's requirements governing petitions to intervene. Moreover, the Petition contains scandalous allegations. In particular, the Petition alleges the followings o Sandra Long Dow has "been detained, harassed, and molested by individuals and parties, either in the direct pay, or under the control of the licensse [ sic),
in order to prevent those investigations into violations at the CPSES facility." Petition at 2-3.
o Micky-Dow "was forced to flee his home, in Texas, for .
fear of his life and safety, as a direct and proximate result of-telephone threats made to him by one Earl -
[ sic] Nye, an executive officer of the licensee."
Petition at 2.
Feb. 21, 1992). Texas Utilities Electric Co. (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 & 2), CLI-92-12, 36 NRC (1992). The opinion did not address TU Electric's request for admonition of the Dows, which was made in its Answer to the above-cited petition and motion (filed Mar. 16, 1992).
The instant Petition provides even more support,for admoniahment, considering its untrue and scandalous allegations.
These_ allegations are unsubstantiated, false, and scandalous. In particular, the latter allegation is preposterous, especially considering the fact that, following Mr. Nye's conversation with Mr. Dow, TU Electric attempted to cooperate with Mr. Dow by arranging for TU Electric managers to meet with Mr. Dow to learn of any safety concerns he might have had.u Furthermore, Mr. Dow neglects to mention the most probable reason that he has chosen not to remain in Texas. As the enclosed Affidavit of David L. Andrews to this response demonstrates, Mr. Dow is a convicted felon, and there are felony arrest and misdemeaner warrants outstanding against him in Texas.u In this. circumstance, it is likely that Mr. Dow's inability to establish standing is a result of his own conduct.
In summary, similar to their previous pleadings, the Dows'
. Petition does not comply with the Commission's requirements, ,
contains scurrilous claims, and omits material facts. As a result, the Petition should not be accepted for filing.
II. The Dows - and DWCPSES Do Not Have Standing to Intervene In the context of a request for extension of an existing conatruction permit, standing to intervene is determined by the i
l same principles as would be used to evaluate standing to l
l' l E/ Sag letter dated September 1, 1991, from the Dows to l Chairman Ivan Selin at 1-2.
2/ It is our understanding that two of these arrest warrants remain outstanding. A third has been dismissed.
l
.. _ ... _ -_ ~ . _ . . . __ . - _ - _ . . __ _ _ . . _
l i
l
-intervene in proceedings related to a new construction permit or operating license. Northern Indiana Public Service Co. (Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear 1), LBP-80-22, 12 NRC 191, 196,
=aff'd, ALAB-619, 12 NRC 558, 563-65 (1980) (holding that the Board would grant standing to "those p** itioners who are in a position to allege injury from the operation of the facility if they otherwise qualify for intervention, including raising at least one contention within the scope c1 tais proceeding").
Section 2.714(a)_of the NRC's regulations addresses these principles, requiring that petitions for intervention set forth the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, how that L
interest might be affected by the result of the proceeding, the reasons why they should be permitted to intervene, and the specific aspects of the subject matter as to which intervention is sought. 10 C.F.R. S 2.714(a)(2) (1992). The NRC has held that geographic proximity of a petitioner's residence to a nuclear plant is enough to comply with the interest requirements of 10 C.F.R. S 2.714 for construction permit and operating license proceedings. Virginia Electric Power Co. (North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-522, 9 NRC 54, 56 (1979). Distances of up to 50 miles from a nuclear power plant
-have been found to be within the geographical zone of interest.
Tennessee Valley Authority (Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 &
2), ALAB-413, 5 NRC 1418, 1421 n.4 (1977).
In the absence of a showing of residence within 50 miles, the Commission applies judicial concepts of standing' in i
4 determining whether a party has sufficient interest in the
- proceedings. Portland General Electric Co. (Pebble Springs Nuclear Plant, Units 1 & 2), CLI-76-27, 4 NRC 610, 613-14 (1976).
A two-pronged test applies: (1) whether the action being challenged has caused or will probably cause some injury-in-fact j to the person seeking to establish standing; and (2)_whether such injury is arguably within the zone of interests protected by the !
statute governing the proceedings. Id at 613; aan also Lujan v.
Defenders of Wildlife, 112 S. Ct. 2130 (1992).U l The Petition does not allege thzt the Dows reside within 50 l miles of the CPSES. In fact, their mailing address is given as Monroeville, Pennsylvania, which is hundreds of miles from the site. In an apparent effort to overcome this, the Petition states that R. Micky Dow " owns property in Hood County, Texas, in
- the' City of Granbury, Texas, which is within a 50 mile radius of ,
the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, and could be adversely B/ -In the event that a petitioner lacks standing to intervene as of right under judicial. standing concepts, he may nevertheless be admitted to a proceeding as a matter of discretion. Pebble Springs, supra, 4 NRC at 614-15. Whi-le discretionary intervention will depend on an assessment of all the facts and circumstances of the particular case, petitioners who show significant ability to contribute on substantial issues of law or fact and set forth these matters with suitable specificity to allow their evaluation will be more readily granted permission. Idm at 617. The burden of demonstrating that he/she could make a valuable contribution lies with the petitioner, and "[i)n this regard, broad, generalized averments will not suffice."
Nuclear Engineering Co. (Sheffield, Ill., Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Site), ALAB-473, 7 NRC 737, 745 (1978). The Petition provides no basis whatsoever for granting discretionary intervention.
7 4
4 affected by any accident therein." Petition at 2.U However, this statement does'not indicate the nature of the property owned by Mr. Dow (i.e., whether the property is real or personal, and whether the property is tangible or intangible). In order to base standing on proximity to a nuclear facility, a petitioner must describe the nature of his/her property or residence, as well as its proximity to the facility, and should describe how the health and safety of the petitioner may be jeopardized.
Enythern States Power Co. (Pathfinder Atomic Plant), LBP-89-30, 30 NRC 311, 315 (1989); ang also Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2), LBP-79-7, 9 NRC 330, 336-38 (1979) (holding that a petitioner, who lived several hundred
- miles from the site, but owned and rented out farmland which he visited occasionally and which was 10 to 15 miles from the site, had not demonstrated a proximity to the site which would establish an interest adequate for standing. An occasional trip to the farm was held to be " insufficient to determine [that] his i health and. safety would be endangered.")_ Hence, even assuming.
for the sake of argument that Mr. Dow owns property in Granbury, 1/ The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania recently dismissed an action filed by the Dows and DWCPSES.due to Petitioners' lack of standing. The Court's determination was based in part on the Dows' failure to show injury to themselves due to their lack of proximity to the CPSES. San Dow v. Texas-Utilities Electric Co.,
Docket No. 91-1238, Slip op.;(W.D.-Pa. June 23, 1992)
)
(citing Apr. 6,-1992 Report and Recommendation of U.S.
Magistrate Judge R.C. Mitchell). The Magistrate Judge noted that "the plaintiffs, professed residents of Pennsylvania, have neither alleged nor shown that they have been injured by the defendants' actions." Report and Recommehdation at 5 n.6.
1 4
I Texas, the Petition still has not described how his health and safety will be jeopardized by ownership of such property in a way sufficient to establisn standieg.
It remains then to consider whether the Dows have aatisfied both the injury-in-fact and zone of interest testa with respect to any other of their assertions. The first of these indicates that Mr. Dow "has already been adversely affected" in that he "was forced to f:.ee his home, in Texas, for fear of his life and safety, as a direct and pre almate result of telephone threata made to him by one Earl (sic] Nye, an executive officer of the lic'ensee." Petition at 2. Similarly, Mrs. bow is also said to be precluded from residing within 50 miles of thL CPSES because of the same threats. : Petition at 2. The Petition further states that Mrs. Dow has been adversely affected because she was
" detained, harassed, and melested by individuals and parties, either in the direct pay, or under the control of the licensee."
Petition at 2-3. \s discussed in Section I above, these allegations ara-unsubstantiated, false, and scandalous. Moreover, they do not establish any radiological health and safety concern which either is related to this proceeding or is within the zone of interests protected by the Atomic Energy Act.El Furthermore, the Petition does not establish or allege that any outcome in the instant proceeding would adversely affect Petitioners or could remedy the injury which they claim to have suffered. San Dellums v. NRC, 863 F.2d 968, 973-74 (D.C. Cir.
10/- In this regard, Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act is not implicated by the Dows' accusations, because the Dows have not alleged that they have been employed by TU Electric j or its contractors at CPSES.
]
1988) (in order to have standing to challenge a licensing action, a petitioner must show a " substantial likelihood" that denial of the license would redress the petitioner's alleged injury).
Therefore, the Dows have not demonstrated any interest under judicial concepts of standing which would qualify either of them for standing in this proceeding.
Furthermore, to the extent that the Dows are requesting intervention on behalf of the DWCPSES, they have not addressed the requirements for organizational standing set forth in Houston Lighting & Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Ur tt 1) , ALAB-535, 9 NRC 377, 389-94 (1979). In particular, the Petition does not allege any organizational injury nor identify any members of DWCPSES who have authorized DWCPSES to represent them in this proceeding and who have indi'.idual standing.
In conclusion, the Dows have not established standing for ,
themselves on the basis of the proximity of their residence or their property to the CPSES. Nor have they asserted any other injury in fact which falls within the zone of interests protected by the Atomic Energy Act. Furthermore, they have not established organizational standing on behalf of the DWCPSES. Hence, the Petition for leave to intervene and the request for a hearing should be denied based on the lack of standing of the Petitioners.El 11/ While declining to rule on standing, the Commission recently observed in an order denying another petition for intervention filed by the Dows, that "we have strong doubts that [the Dows] could satisfy our standing requirements.
First, the Dows themselves live in Pennsylvania while
- ~ - - . _ . _ . , -- - . . . _ _ _
-l J
III. The Petition Does Not Specifically Identify Ang_Aggects or the subject Matter fnr Int.orvention Section-189a of the Atomic Energy Act does not provide an unqualified right to a hearing to persons whose interests may be affected by a proceeding. Rather, prospective intervenors must j establish their right to a hearing by complying with the NRC's l procedural regulations. Business and Professional People for the Public Interest v. Atomic Energy Commission, 502 F.2d 424, 428
-(D.C. Cir. 1974). The NRC's procedural regulations require that a person whose interest may be affected by a proceeding and who desires to participate as a party must file a written petition to
. intervene which sets forth "the specific aspect or aspects of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to ,
intervene." 10 C.F.R. S 2.714(a)(2) (1992).
Petitioners have-not identified the specific aspects of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which they wish to intervene (nor have they identified any contentions). Instead, the Petition filed.by the Dows and DWCPSES merely asserts that
" pursuant [to) 42 U.S.C. 2239(a)(1) the Commission is required to grant _such a. hearing." Petition at 4. As indicated above, Petitioners are incorrect. Because they have not complied with the~NRC's procedural requirements-for_ intervention (i.e., they have not identified _the specific aspects of the subject matterlof Comanche Peak is in Texas. Thus, it is unlikely the Dows themselves have standing. .Moreover, the Staff raises Lseveral possibly-valid ccacerns regarding the standing of the Disposable Workers organization." Texas Utilities o Electric Co. (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 L &;2)'CLI-92-12,_36 NRC , Slip op. at 16-17 n.9 (1992).
l l .,,
, , . . . _ . . , _ , _ _ . . _ . . . _ ,, ~
l
- 23 -
the proceeding as to which they wish to intervene), they are not entitled to a hearing. Thus, the Petition fails the threshold requirements of 10 C.F.R. S 2.714(a)(2) and should be denied.
IV. Petitioners' Due Process Rights Are Not vielated by the NRC's Granting of an Extension of the Time Allotted for CESES Unit 2 Construction.
The Petition asserts that Petitionera have filed two other petitions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and two other petitions before the NRC, regarding the operating license for Unit 1 and the construction permit for Unit
- 2. Petition at 3-4. Without citing any authority, the Petition concludes that "[t]o institute, convene, and/or conduct any proceeding which might in some manner have an adverse effect upon those pending matters would pose some serious Due Process questions .... Petition at 3-4. This conclusion assames that .
the NRC's extension of the CPSES Unit 2 construction permit _
renders litigation in other forums moot or would be dispositive of issues raised in those forums. The Petition provides no support for this assumption. In fact, the issues being litigated in the other forums cited by the Petition are unrelated to any issue which can properly be associated with the extension of the Unit 2 construction permit.LU Also, the NRC's grant of an 12/ Petitioners' May 19th 10 C.F.R. S 2.206 petition and the associated petition for temporary restraining order before the court of appeals (D.C. Cir. Docket No. 92-1224) did request suspension of NRC's consideration of TU Electric's anplication to extend the construction permit for Unit 2.
however, none of the issues raised by the Petitioners in those pleadings related to the merits of TU Electric's l
l extension for the Unit 2 construction permit on July 28, 1992 has not been shown to have any effect on Petitioners' position in other litigation. Furthermore, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S 2.109 and 5 U.S.C. S 558(c),.even if the NRC had refrained from acting on TU Electric's application for an extension, the existing Unit 2 construction permit would still have remained in effect.lu l
Therefore, Petitioners' position in other litigation is no l different now than it would have been in the absence of NRC action. In conclusion, the extension of the construction permit f
application for extension. Furthermore, because the Petitioners have a right to file (and in fact have iiled) a petition to intervene challenging the extension, it is .
absurd for them to argue that they have been deprived of any due process rights related to the extension.
13/ Section 2.109(a) of 10 C.F.R. (1992) provides:
Except for the renewal of an operating license for a nuclear power plant under 10 CFR 50.21(b) or 50.22, if at least 30 days prior to_the expiration of an existing license authorizing any activity of continuing nature, the licensee-files an application for a renewal or for a new license for the activity so authorized,-the existing license will not be deemed to have expired until the application has been finally determined.
Similarly, 5-U.S.C. S 558(c) (1988) provides in parts l
When the-licensee has made timely and sufficient application for a renewal or a new license in accordance with agency rules, a license with reference to an activity of a continuing nature does not expire until the application has been i finally determined by the agency.
l L . - . - _ - -
has not affected Petitioners' other litigation and has not deprived Petitioners of due process,1U 11/ 'Furthermore, even-if it is assumed that other litigation were to be: rendered _ moot, it is not apparent how the PetitionersLwould have any-due process interests at stake.
In essence, Petitioners appear to be taking the position thet the:NRC.may not take-any action-that relates to a pending petition before the courts, regardless of how-frivolous or unsupported the petition may be. Obviously, such a position is absurd on its' face. Furthermore, if such a position were to-be accepted, petitioners could indefinitely block any action by NRC.
4 V. CQHCLUSION For the reasons stated above, the peti; ion to intervene should not be accepted for filing because the Petition contains untrue and scandalous allegations. Additionally, the Petition should be summarily denied because the Petitioners have not demonstrated standing to intervene. Finally, the Petition should be denied since Petitioners have not specifically identified aspects of_the subject matter of the proceeding which they desire to litigate.
Respectfully submitted,
/
Of Counsel
/ OfAf Y
$pinTe~ I/ Edg'ar //
Robert A. Wooldridge Steven 4. Frantz Worsham, Forsythe, Samples Nancy L. Ranek
& Wooldridge Newman & Holtzinger, P.C. _
2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 1000 Suite 3200 1615 L Street, N.W.
- Dallas, TX 75201- Washington, D.C. 2003e
. (214) 979-3000 (202) 955-6600 Attorneys for Texas Utilities Electric Company August 14, 1992
-. .~- - - . . .. ~ . . - - - _ - . . - . . -
.g. .
f ML 1,LD
-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY-COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AED 92 AUG 17 A10:17 LICENSING BOARD ,
. A+m :n .:LniTAe v DuChi !#, A 'i iWlU il Alp
= In the Matter of )
)
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC )
-COMPANYc ) Docket No. 50-446
)
- (Comanche' Peak Steam Electric ) Construction Permit
- Station, Unit 2) ) Amendment
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I
I hereby certify that copies of "TU Electric's Answer ,
to--the Petition for Intervention and Request for Hear!.ngs by the
-- Dows" together:with a cover letter to the Secretary rf the
~
~ Commissioni was served upon the following persons by deposit in ,
-the United; States mail, postage prepaid and proper]y addressed, on the date shown belows-Morton B. Margulies,_ Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board .
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cenmission Washington, D.C. 20555 JamesEH. Carpenter
- Atomic-Safety _and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory _ Commission Washington,~D.C. 20555 Peter S. Lam Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
--U.S. Nuclear Regulatory-Commission Washington, D.C.- 20555 n
Janice-Moore,nEsq. '
' Marian Ls- Zobler,-Esq.
. Michael-H. Finkelstein, Esq.
Office of the General Counsel U.S. Nuclear: Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555~
l j' 7
l Secretary ,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Washington, D'.C. 20555 Attn: Chief, Docketing Service Section l
-(Original plus two' copies)
Michael D. Kohn Stephen M. Kohn Kohn, Kohn and Colapinto, P.C.
517 Florida Averne Washington, D.C. 20001 l R. Micky Dow Sandra Long Dow 322 Mall > Blvd., #147 Monroeville, PA 15146 Office of Commission :ppellate Adjudication U.S.-Nuclear Regulatc'y Commission Washington, D.C. 205;3
. Dated this-14th day of August, 1992, dug / Cd N cy I/. Ranek N wman & Holtzinger, P.C.
1 15 L Street, N.W.
Suite 1000' Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 955-6822 i
Mn ;, ,
% #s .
l 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i THE U.8.-DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES In the Matter of: 5 5
YVONNE WILKINSON 5 5
Complainant 5 5
vs. 5 Case No. 92-F.RA-16 5
TEXAS UTILITIES 5 5
Respondent 5 3 4
AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID L, ANDREwy, STATE OF TEXAS 5 5
COUNTY OF DALIAS 5 ,
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Mr. David .L. Andrews, who, after being first duly sworn, deposed .
and said as follows: _
- 1. My true and correct name is David L. Andrews. I am presently employed by Texas Utilities Services, Inc. as Director of corporate Security.
- 2. On February 18, 1992, I caused a search to be conducted of the records of the criminal District Clerk, Tarrant County, Texas. That. search established that there is a warrant for the arreat of Mr. Dow presently outstanding in Cause (0426207D, pending in Criminal District Court, $1 in Tarrant County, Teras. This warrant was issued August 30, 1991 in connection with the Exhibit 3 I . . . . .
prosecution of Mr. Dow on a felony charge of Theft by Check. (see Attachment 1, copy of outstanding warrant and Attachment 2, copy of certified court documents relating to criminal charge of felony theft).
- 3. Also, I caused a search to be conducted of public records in Hood County, Texas.- That search revealed that on October 14, 1991, a warrant was issued for the arrest of Mr. Dow in Cause iF-91-126. This warrant charged him with the felony offense of Forgery. (See Attachment 3, certified copy of court documents relating to warrant of arrest in Cause (F-91-126).
- 4. I also caused a search to be conducted of the public records of the Clerk of the County Court of Erath Cotmty, Texas.
That search establishes that there is a warrant for the arrest of Mr. Dow presently outstanding in cause #21,969 panding in County Court of Erath County. A warrant was issued on January 9,1992 on '
a misdemeanor charge of Theft over $200.00. (See Attachment 4, copy of court documents including certification of warrant).
- 5. In October 1991, I caused a search to be conducted of the public records of the Federal Records Center in Ft. Worth, Texas.
Review of public records found during that search established that on August 17, 1979, Mr. Dow was convicted in U.S. District Court, Northern Judicial District of Texas, on felony charges relating to the breaking and entering of postal vehicles. Mr. Dow was sentenced to a Federal prison for this conviction. The cause number for this criminal action was CR-4-79-64. (See Attachment 5,
.APPIDAVIT OF DAVID L. Al[Dluj!E - Page 2 ,
l
F. n '
certified copies of documents relating to criminal action CR-4 %
64).
- 6. I caused a rearch to be conducted of the public records of the Tarrant County Court Clerk. Raview of records found during that search established that on August 2,1979, Mr. Dow pled guilty and was convicted in cause (0144335 of the criminal of fense of Theft by Check, a misdemeanor. (See Attachment 6, certified >
exemplified records relating to conviction of Mr. Dow in cause 10144335).
.7 . A review of the records of the clerk of the District Court for Tarrant County, Texas established that on January 16, 1976, Mr. Dow was convicted in Cause fl1411A of the criminal offense of Burglary, and that probation was revoked on September 7, 1979. (See Attachment 7, certified copies of court documents in Cause (11411A).
- 8. I am personally acquainted witt. R. Micky Dow and mailed him by U.S. mail the original letter dated April 8, 1991, (a true and correct copy is attached as Attachment 8) concerning his negotiation on behalf of individuals with TO Electric.
-FURTHER AFFIANT-SAITH NOT.
)
n a 1
David L. - Andrews 9
AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID L. ANDREWS - Page 3 ,
l
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN To BEFORE ME on the i day of huQrQ- '
, 1992.
')
(010.3.$dAa Notary Public in ang for the State of Texas f(L . Yi Notary's printed name /
-- My commission Expires: ' ' ^ R ' ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ '
l D CARA D. HICKEY l
. . hetary rulHr.9me of lam
\~;pg/ N"WM l
.I.--------,'
4 AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID L. ANDREWS - Page 4 ,
rREC UUND e-- J V,V.V V . V V wv v v , , i n.
0426207 = ALIAS
- CRIMINAL DISTRICT-COURT NO. 1 ^
THE STATE,OF TEXAS 0426207D <C No.
COUNTY OF TARRANT 2'
'TO.-- ANY PEACE OFFICEft OF THE TARRANT COUNTY
- "~
STATE OF TEXAS, GREETINGS:
hereby commanded to take the body of ,O
- You are RICHARD E DOW JR and him safely nfb P
s J z '
k e e p,- so that you have him before the Honordle THE STATE OF TEXAS VS CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. t in and for RICHARD 'E DOW JR 7373 BRAZOS RIVER Tarrant County, at the Court House thereof, GRANDBURY TX 112347 W in the Ci'iy of Fort Worth, instanter, to answer issued the 30T%ay M the State of Texas on a charge by indletment of ~
9,i AUGUS,T 19 THEFT 750-20000-CK _
_ Came to hand on the day of , 19 and executed on the day of ,
a Xtoit&Jawi felony. A. D. 19 issued under my hand and seal of office in the City of Fort Worth,- Texas ,
.Tarrant County, Texas .
this 30THday of AUGUS,T gg 91 ,
THOMAS P. HUGHES Arrest . . . . . . . . . $
CLERK DISTRICT COURT Mile a ge . . . . . . . . .
. TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS Miscellaneous . . .
By / de 1 - Deputy ohal pg FORM D. C.265 C R Attachment 1 to Dave Andrews Affidavit f
I ACERTIFIKf0PL nrisTJrLL $ q V. L THOMAS P. E'FDIES Criminal D1::trict Clerk g unty. Texas EL 'T , J t/ ,
Deputy 4
r - , - . - e--me- ,a - - - , -
- ~ ~ --
+
e ete eesi THE STATE OF TEXAS OF MM J 1 THOMAS r, HUGHES, clerk of the Dutrtet Courts of said County of Tenant h the State of Tetas, do hereby certify that the within sad preceding paps contain a fd. complete, true and euct copy of Irdictment, Warrant, Deferdants Walvor of Arraignment ard g , , , , , ,7
, Appearatice aoraa watri sittactment, tscord in Cause No. 04N7D ,The State of Teus Platntiff,vs
, Defendant.
Given under my hand and seal of omce, et Fort Worth,in said County of Tarrant, State of Teus, th!s **h day of Octeber A.D.19.91 ,
THOMAS P. HUGHES CLERK OF THE DISTRICT COURTS T,AR COUNTY,TEXA3 by . y /- I/ Deputy THESTATEOFTEXASf COUNTY OF TARRANTj I, _ Sharen Wilson Judge of the Criminal District Court Nxber One of the State of Texas, presid ng in the County of Tarrant, do he'reby certify that the Deputy Cler's whose name appears to be algued to the above certincate,is and was at tho time of signirig the same, the Deputy Clerk of said District Court therein mentioned,and a;auch was the proper person to make said certlScate, and that the same la in due form.
Given under my hand omcially tNs 9th esy of Cetcher ,q. 4, p o 91 rZ
_- CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT " M TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
.=
THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT
!, THOMAS P. HUGHES, Clerk of the District Courts, Tarrant County, Texas do hereby certify that Sharen Wilson Judge of the CritlM1 D2stnct Court Rrter me of Tarrant County,Teus,is, and was, at time of signing the same,the da!y elected, qualified aa.d acting Judge of said Court herein mentioned and as su:h was the proper person to make said certincate,and that the same isin das form.
Given under my hand and seal of omce,at Fort Worth,in astd County of Tarrant, State of Teusahis C"% day of October A. D. I9 N ,
THOMAS P. HUGHES CLERK OF THE DISTRICT COURTS TAR MTB COUNTY, TEXAS by - ( '/// b-- Dep'aty Attachment 2 to Lave Ancre o nifTUavit l
. 0@
".NAME RICHARD E DOW JR OFFENSE THEFT 750-20000-CK ADDRESS 7373 BRAZDS RIVER DATg 06-29-M CRANDBURY TX_76048 g,p, BARBARA HOWELL RACE W ' SEX H AGE 43 DOB 23-47 C.C.
CASE NO,0426207 FILED: (DATE) 12-04-90 AGENCY TC DIST ATTY OFFICE PC HAS BEEN DETERMINED
'IRANSTER: COURT DATE OFFENSE NO. COURT CDC1 04 A "
INDICTMENT NO.
YN THE NAME AND BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
THE GRAND JUROR 8 OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, duly elected, tried, empatieled, sworn and charged to , inquire of offenses comitted in Tarrant County, in the Stato of Texas, upon their oath $ do present in and to the *********
CRIMlflAL DISTPJCT COURT fl0.1 of said County thac **
' RICHARD E DOW JR hereinaftar called Defendant, in the County of Tctr:nt and State aforesaid, on or about the 29TH day of JUNE 19% ,did
-THEN AND THERE INTENTIONALLY APPROPRIATE, BY ACQUIRING AND OTHERWISE EXERCISING CONTROL OVER, PROPERTY, TO-WIT: STORE NERCHANDISE, OF THE VALUE OF $750 OR MORE, BUT LESS THAN $20,000 FROM THE OWNER, BARBARA HOWELL, WITHOUT THE EFFECTIVE CONSENT OF THE OWNER AND WITH INTENT T0' DEPRIVE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, ENHANCEMENT COUNT:
PARAGRAPH ONE: AND, IT IS FURTHER PRESENTED IN AND TO SAID CGURT, THAT PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION OF THE PRIMARY OFFENSE, THE SAID DEFENDANT, ON THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1979, IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NUMBER FOUR OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, IN CAUSE NUMBER 11411A, WAS CONVICTED OF A FELONY, TD-WITt BURGLARY,.
AND THE SAID CONVICTION PECAME FINAL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION OF THE PRIMARY OFFENSES
- -ENHANCEMENT COUNT:
-PARAGRAPH TWO: AND, IT IS FURYHER PRESENTED IN AND TO SAID COURT, THAT PRIOR.
TO Th. COMMISSION OF THE PRIMARY OFFENSE THE SAID DEFENDANT, UNDER THE NAME OF RICHARD E. 'MICKY* DOW, ON THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST,1979, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION, IN CAUSE Hl'MBER CR-4-79-64, WAS CONVICTED OF A FELONY, 70-WIT ( NSPIRACY, AND DREAKING AND ENTERING POSTAL VEHICLES AND AIDINC AND ACETTING, id %IOLATION OF TITLE 16, U. S. C., SECTIONS 371 AND 1705 AND 2., AND THE SAID CONVICTION DECAME FINAL PRIOR T0_THE COMMISSION OF THE PRIMARY OFFENSES Filed (Clerk's use on?
filed THons P. Huchts. Dist, et!RK TARRANT COUNTY.TEXA3 DEC 11 1990
- v. Ud AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE. Bf - D'P4
%% AAA Criminal District Attorney
~
wos m
- Fo[emanoftheCrandJury INDICTWNT OmOWAt
.e.
REC BOND = 15000.00 CID-0044727 0426207 ALIAS CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1
- THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT N o. 0426207D F I LE D . . , ,, , 3 TO ANY PEACE OFFICER OF THE 1t*(,%N' '
STATE'OF TEXAS, GREETINGS: TAR, RANT COUNTY You are hereby -commanded tegj taMi he E >[hy of t
4' RICHARD E DOW-_ JR an him safely Ik him gy,,_ .[ el8?
keep, so that - you have before the Honoreble ' THE STATE OF TEXAS
' VS.
. CRIMINAL DIITRICT COURT NO. t' . In end for RICHARD E DOW' JR 7373 BRAZOS RIVER Tarrent County, at the Court House thereof, GRANDPURY TX 112347 L in - the City of - Fort Worth, ins ta n ter, to answer issued the 13THday of the State of Texas on e charge by leoictment of THEF*T 750-20000-CK Cami to hand on tne day of , 19 and executed on the C X104Wi k'tt1M a r felony, '
nt Ci of Fort rth. To as
- " ""'Y' I'
this 13TH day of DECEMBER jg 90, THOMAI p, W .HEg Bf . Deputy.
Arrest . . . . . . .. $_
CLERK D!ITRICT COURT Milea ge . . . ..
TAR ANT COUNTY, EXAS Miscellaneous .
B A M 74. uty otaf .
FORM D. C. 265 C R / _ /' d ...
e
.t ', -
) #:
A x '
I e 4, e e.
2 NO. 426,207-D THE STATE OF TEXAS X IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT VS. 4.,
NUMBER ONE OF
-RICHARD EMERY DOW, JR. X TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT'S WAIV'.R OF ARRAIGNMENT TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF TI!E COURT:
COMES NOW Defendant in this case, and valves arraignment in the case, and would show the Court the following:
I.
Defendant. has been furnia.hed a copy of the charging instrument, and Defendant'b name is correctly spelled. Defendant is represented by Andrew Ottaway. For the purposes of arraignment, Defendant valves the reading cf the charging instrument and enters
-a plea of not guilty. '
. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant prays that the Court accept and approve this waiver cf arraign 1 pent.
Respectfully submitted, Andrew Ottaway A'ITORNEY AT I.AW 1320 Plaza Drive North Cranbury, Texas. 76048 ggg (817) 579-1104 T R NT UNTY.T g- g jggj /Andtow ottaway -
CBN 15342850 Tima --- l ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
. ~
{
t
M t
cLRTIFICATE OF BERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this doeunent has been handed to the attorney representing the state.
s- DATED: January _ , 1991.
Andrew ottaway ORDER on this' the 1 day of <dw#7 , 1991, this Waiver of Arraignment van considered by the Co rt and. approve
/
7DGE PRESIDING 9
9 4
.rv i n & * . ' t,KNW'/l
- p APPtAtANOUQHD (L.
WARiANT NO.N/a*lO*7 b SONDNO.)6DM THE $1 Aft OF ffXA8 0 F H.t. Li .
KNOW Att MEN IY THist PtistNTS:
copitty or rr(tw 0 1M, Age,@@ h.
I Tho' we, fal/A e A E As c#u 'DM Q~( .
and . os Prhelpot C6i B Att 10ND. ' gtrplesdre heG:nd furth bound unto the State of Tesos, h the Pont-t sum of; Fi A*TYtMltlamt.not) d!AdJ$ li.Do6 i DOLLAR 3. for Dr*L.ent of wNch sum, well l
and tw to be mode, onc on odditional. necM55ty expenses that ma,e be heurred tritiis Shortff or other Peoce Officers
' h re-crres1Ing PrhcJpol h Ihe event th* conditons of thtbond ere Wofod. we 00 bhd ov'seVes. ers hen, erocutors ond odminbiroiors, johtly ord severtIW6ents&e conditori of the otsovo obligoAt n t thoi whereos sod Pibelpd stond cheged by (compcht)(hformotlor0 (indictment).cA' *,ed h the ':2% s'7t's 04 Cost of** *'7d88dFi
,ounty, fonos w ine offense of a (felony) 4 wweee ;.r). i
.. T~dAl?T* DQL .!]50 = U LIMA Alt*h t. Oo O to wit.
AND sod PrincipOIWQ1 reOJ ed to gYo bolh tTdsum of $. /8. 000 oppe1ronce before ttWD L~ffi tCT*
for their persorVS Court of fAntAwTCounty.1enos.
NO"!. it the sold Prhelpd shot wel ond trtty moke their persond oppooronce bstonfer before sold Court of sod County Sto'o of Texos, of its present to m, y now h sospon. ot !!s nort regtkr term W ncw h vocoton, to be he0 et i the Court House of sold County, h the City of f3R$MC __ fenos, and further.sh<:sf wel and tW moke ti*r personot ,
oppooronce tefore sod Court, h sou County, $ tote of Toxos. Os wel os tefore ony other Court to wNch the some moy be transferred, and for ony ord of subs *Quent proceedngs thot may be hod relotive to the Sod charge h the e me of crimhd oction based on sou c%rge, and there to remoh frcen doy to der and from term to term of sod Couri.unil dSchcroed by due cotne of kw. then ord them to onswer sod .: ccusation ogonst the sod Principal tNs obbgot:on shos become vou: otherwise remon h fue force and affect.
$1GNID ond DAftDINs the /9 doy of hjDiE#4 -
19 -
$UttTY: CH BArt ONO AM._ __s #M PRINCtPAb - b_.) . -.
ADDRti$: .1020 Glen he8Rd.
ADDRt$$: 8 96 AA 021AITb h I
' ffY: _Steohenvito STATtQevos f Cffy:_ STf'th//A/f/1Ld" 11P _76Cf filtPHONb (817) 065 dW STATI:IIJA $.
SuttTY ZIP CODE: 4dC/
ADDtt3s:
tittPHONE:( 1941~- Wi#
Cfry: $1 Aft:
Zlh itLIPHONE: C ) Wd #8 M '
f C- /WL , f OATH OF SURER [$
wu2 4ru (t THE stATI OT TEXAS 0
. COUNTY OF ttATH 0 i &d. du Opg .
\Nh. CbOd19111L ond (to swoor that each of us are h our own right wortt -* lenst the sum of. ($ 3 d Doo $
TN f f7v ""TW#ti.1 Slo (TW:0E THE AMOUh. ; f DOND),of1erdeductbo from our property oilthot WNch 3 Clemp4J by tre Constif tfon and Lows of the State from forced sc. e offer the payment of ol debts of every descrtption kn v.hether hdMdud or secur#y debts. und o'te otistyhg ol encumbronces upon our property, wtdch ore M7Y "THfySANoy u eoch have proper +y h the .*ltof e of f(nos, B ?:i 1o enecution, worth:
' ($ad A A i(TWICE THE AMOUNT OF BOND).
curuOP8si g #/ - sup -
$UBS D AND 5 WORN TO BIFORt ME, ty Y(( Am M -. ond ca4Ns *5e N dayof /"J#G*MMM .19.$l ORIGINAL -
,/ - . hthg NotAr6 PUBU'd.ERATH CDUNTY. TEXAS
,-- * %feby cet y $ hot the $uretles whose
'/nis ore sub6ertbed to tht bond are good TAKE G APPROkttD thb the M d i l
17CMTNV 19 for tho omount thereor ord if tNs bond
- was subm? led to me fof opprovot. i would
- occ ptsome, l f) F . lth
\
.s52.1 _ COum.itxAs imn. M # dt uinv.TtxAs
. r ~~~") s 1/' ^
y- g- ,'; jig g q p :pger 3 g -g-esttiu n t *
- i ! [ U 0,
L I e
t i i s,Pj'bt-tU(n b g 7 b l ! ~! ! D74 s j 5 15 i biPp;pI!! Ri lJ ld ?m i ;
j i e i i . .s I l ! Ie E! g 5
.S 1*
! l@! -
p &. s o *
- E 1 [x n,
x 5
i I . L
.n kD p- r.. E.
E
! ! C
,k b.,
QIM w,'
q6 a n:r u :.
,' ?.; D*
l
, - ~Tg.;wd b e
E : :
!w 5
_.[ .: g Q%+4 y e I i E -
p El l 1
la ip.iv
!l E ! i Z! g ;
I I i y %n e!_M '
g i Il I l 91 5 12 q i
o -- r 4 % l t <[ 5 2%'l6 f I i -
4 __
i -.{6 i ij l *I M . ;
(
s i i i o{ _
T P 7g a 8 ) ~I >'8 je )
e
- 2620'.
Nh*
6.. n, e, v/RNT
, ~ ' .
1 1)tuult nt.t l P.1,RY.cr 9UIb,N,\9 IN b N 301% '
18 W' ' ' * '
C2372 SD ERATH COUNTY IANANI U M SO TARTANT COUNTY REFsDOW,'RICHAND E JR W/th 1MrJ95 80426207D A7:47Utiff'5 0U'TThEFT OVER 6750 UNDER SUEJECT e E( ,000. FUND HAS MADE BOND ON RbuM't N RGEACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT TO STSZ.
- 35@9.
AUTHsROBIN UNEEN/ CORRECT)0NS OFFICCR SU ERATH CD COMM/PONPh + IET990 10t2CDT FROM STSZ FOR FWSZ 12/19/%0 18:22 OUTPUT MSG Ofr5, .
. .. e crio r ge by indictmen"t o"f
~ lesued the 12Vjy THETT 750-000po.cK & RE P DECEMl; Egg ,op Come to hand on the day of . 19 s ,
and esecuted on the e rMideM(eWXfelony* 1 Issued under my tend and seat of 'offke by "lill d l>A. Ormd-
'In the City of Fort Worth. Texas
. h(b m/leMD W n tic >J 1TV ' ~
this 12Tb'oy of LECEMBEI 90 ' '
. 19 .
THOMAX P. HUGHES dy .Douw.
Artest . . . . . . . . , s Ct.E Q DISTRR.T COURT TA R'N CO PfT TEXAS "U *****,,,
Miscellaneout
/
fA D. C. 265*C R
'- =. Deputy Toget ,, ,I3, IS{ S
. +
l l
l e
i e ~- n v - , -,-,. .-~,r
(-
i I
ik *
'. l t
No._f*1t*I2G 1
l l
THE STATE OF TEXA8 i
vs. i RICHARD EMERY DOW, JR.
(AKA/ Mickey Dow) neome**eeee***********ee**eseeee**********************e***************
s i COMPIAINT s.
I OFFENSE l Forgery - Making coce*********ee****************eeee*****ese*****e*****emee**e*********
FILED 14th day of October, 1991 GEORGE SMITH JUSTICE OF THE PEACE ,
Hood County, Texas '
Precinct 3 & 4 coce******************eenee************e******e***e************ee*****
STATES WITNESSES' RONNIE BLASINGAME
' f. CEORGE E. SMITH, Justice of the Peace, '
Precinct #3 4, do hertbp certify this to be a true and corro:t copy kom my records. ,_
-Attachment 3 to.
- jga/p p/
-c
[ ,
Dave Andrews Affidavit DATE GEORGE E. SMITH I
E osnnGaait c7 ancesT-fe. c.a i-cun s. w a sw,ww k
- --__ s- _ w=me
l [.:c: mar $r:omat:samunen_ - m*f4'h Tite STATE OF TEXAS I y .
i j #
To any Sheriff, Constable ce Peace Ofncer of the State of Teams, Creetingi I
l You Are licreby Commanded to arrest RICHARD EMERY DOW, JR. IAKA/Mirkey nnu)
HIM If to be fovid in por County and bring { ,
l before me, a justice of the Peace in and lot Precinct No_ 3"4 Place No I of HOOD i "}
County, Texas, at my ofBee in ROOM ONE, THE COURTHOUSE, GRANBURY, TEXAS i
I am .e ow I l
l In mid Cenmty, Imrnediately, thea and there to antwer the State of Teus for an rdense against the laws of said State, to-wit: FORGERY MAKING I
1 l
l 8
l.
of whicl, o6ense__.he _ RICHARD, EMERY _DOW. JR. In accused by the written I;
l (AKA/ MICKEY DOW) complaint, under oath, of ._ pnNNTE nr.ARTNn AME Bled before me. I No.no d C 1 l Ilerein Fall Not, but v.I this writ raske due return, showing lurw you have executed the same. !;'
l
\
l Ig_9,l_,
Witness my omeial signature, this __.L4 th day of OCTOBER l Ah - b Justice of the Peace. '
G l
'rectnec No 3 _4., Itee No. 1 nnnn county, Te,,s If: =w-__ _ 2L. _ u._ 2 - t_ _ac - ++- mema _c - + - r.c_ ; -- mswel,
- l. GEORGE E. SMITH Ju tice of the Peace, Precinct #3-4, do hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy from my records. ,
/0 =d- 9/ _ -O*ly ho DATE GEORGE e SMITH O
s
m%
3' i
, AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE
'~
- 11/' '
/O w/
coplainant SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME BY RONNIE BLASINGAME, a credible person, this 14th day of October, A.D. 1991.
=_' p (
, be;:1'W--
JUSTICE OF TF PEACE, HOOD COUNTY 1 Precinct 3 <
s 1e f
4 4
5 i.
e l
e
, s.
CoxpurxT wo. F. H f2.4 oo....................................................................
IN THE NAME AND DY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS T, Ronnie Diasingame, being duly sworn, do state upon my oath that I have good reason to believe and do believe based on the following information:
- 1. That Hickey Dow did sign checks on Brazos River Acres Homeowners Association without proper authorization.
- 2. That Mickey Dow was not and is not on the signature card for Brazos River Acres Homeowners Association.
- 3. That Hickey Dow did forge the name of George Shaw and Richard McGregor on check numbers 115, 116, 118, 262, and 294.
- 4. That these checks were forged by Hickey Dow as reported in a statement this Investigator obtained from Danny Pratt.
- 5. That the total amount of checks forged by Hickey Dow is $1,185.95.
and I charge that heretofore, and before the making and filing of this complaint, on or about the 21st day of May, 1991, in the County cf Hood and State of Texas, RICHARD EMERY DOW, JR. (AKA/ Hickey Dow),
Defendant, did then and there intentionally, with intent to defraud Cnd harm another, make a writing so it purported to be the act of Frank Shaw and Richard McGregor, who did not authorige the act and caid writing was a check of the tenor following:
- Jn' ly t
_~. __ _
11s pC-x:.::e-5 ..
g g :p p.:-=. A S:: m:.
l .yNMAzosil.i. .c)ub r ERP&@ifW3EX7 SNN
- . V M#s #:r#t f5&Ise y a*J h f f.p p v4 k ,
'.?kk==3,l .
Yac. 5 $\E $ !'.4? c.cw i N S k mS h. m $
u
%,$. . hk i* si?g6. .*1 '
s .c %q~ts
- . gl.gbe':. 4" ts.&.gEr=*E e , K i L~c - yW *m q ;; M y ,; v , ~ DOLLARS n%: ..c.g c.v - mA
..- ,- y : .:,o .s z.-
- ~~
.. .- .~ .-
w p. 9 -e:a .r. -
- .4 q 1 9 ';
.";.4\;
m- ..
...w..~.:..-:n
. ... . c.~;.~ %,.& .g> L
.s. ... .:;
-' g q\, ..- 3 g%ym
, ".[ '%.. .a.-
. > """ " % ~
pu,. & ~ p y W -N: deOOO L L GELT 3110 7 3140U13G GOO L 24/000003G000/ 2e
^ ~-
. .. :. . ...~.~...;. , . , . ~=.,.. ..
I
4k..t' ' *
. \. , ' .
3 WAGRANT FOR $6R,,,E.F.T WARRANT NUMBER bN IN THE NAME OF N40 BY 1HL AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAO: .
To 'any Sherif f, Constable, or Peace Of f acar of the State of Texas, Greetingst ',
You are bereby commanded to arrest R. NICKEY 00W. If to be found in vour County and bring R. NICKEY DOW, bef ore me. OtIUNTY JUDGE, in and for Erath County, fewas at my offtcc in STEPHENVILLE, TEXAS, in said County, Amedle tely , then and there to answer the State of . Texas for an offense against the laves of said State, t.o-wi t t THEFT OVER $200.00 UNDER *
$730.00 .
of which offense, the Defendant is accused by T. n *. written poniptaint and inf ortnation, under oath, of PHIL N 1D10 Lf. , filed before me, DILL HAftEY, COUNTY JUDGE.
Herein fail not, but'of this warrant
- iakm due return showing '
how you have executed same. ..,
official signature of *his
, the Mrsy of .
~ '
~ '
AddWAN. .-. . . _..
BILL M. HAILEY 7
, ERATH COUNTY JUOGE '
, , ERATH COUNTY. 1EXAS
- ~
otitcER'e a u.uw .
CAME 9H TO HAND o% .. , [f8.$' . ..,. . L990 6t
...,,s' -
@. __o* clock f'.H., and exseu ted on
, 1990 at _o' clock. .
.H.,
. the within name,Detendant at arrest,ing . .
, in ERATH COUNTY, TEXAS ..
SHERIFF, CONSTABLE OR PEACE OFFICCR,. _... . . . _ , . . .)
STTPHENVILLE, ERATH COUNTY, TEXAS
.. B.Y:../ _- ___. . .,'.
. *pEPVTY., . . . .
. J :;;'
+;a
- .y. ,,..., y. ..'.;.. ...;., +s:.:., .. ,% , , . . - '., : , ' , ,
. . p.p.
Q e
- l. i. . .
} Attachment 4 to ,
. ;9 " '4 . . '
gt?. j . . .
DayeAndrewsAf.ffdaxt*,
').
,}Nh. ~r.,. .o ... . ,. . . .l, .
, .j t.* fly."c.- *
. . .L.,g.g... . ,,s 4 I. .;: %. . I. M
. .pf.,%. . . . . ..
- A' . . .
i
-c-. u4-.+ _A~2A. %_am e 4 6_ J L. 4 +---.a 4_.A 4. J-...a m. a *aa __urm _~h_4.~l_ .A E- J--..-*.-4-- E=4--a .d e A,----4--*%. _a.,.hdam
.J-- n-m4 .,
.maa_& a.Jm
'f l
~ O e
- , . . ~)
9 m m,-, m._ , _ _ _ ,
- n =
fl
~ [,. .
4 4
l t 5 i
/, m ,
, , $ l .-
> i lt a II 8P ,
3 f
l .
I is 1
'1 -
l l 3 i i Tb '
I : I -
a 4 .
s
=
s,c 3! .g
, }
l ,
1 1, 41 L . . 1. -
j
,8E .i g 1' t
j % 35. I 1 il 1 i
= .s *R a r d El t I
j' [R=
l = =
i a E
] ,R g I. -
1 lg j eol j j j .. .
Btm Ig yJaI 1]A -
i i L
ll tal, # . t
=, ; ;
5 pBRl I p .
lhbk j j .] .1 814 A i '
i
_ = _i=__~__ _ - _ _ _
, 5.' ,.
m ,. i-u . . .., ,.. , . . . .
' ,.i , . ,' , ' 98,
~
- i. )
, h..,7 a;4
~
~ A.ri . ;
, _ . x.y _ .
g ,
m e .c I
W 5555 W 2525 l I
G385T W sutass l suum r-ciers of the omnty omzet of armth do hereby---'osctify that the foregoing is a taas County and w i$ n ongy of WARRANT POE ANtEST,11EEFT O/$200 U/5750 WARRANF FOR EktasT.SWEETU DFF B00m In Onuse No. 2L969 __ style 6: W sumEE m w as 15 mitw ames meet- _ _ _ _
es the some apposes in Crisiaal Court Minutes of Brath Omaatyg Teams. ,
Witness hand and seal of said Omart at sqr office h U #2 -*
Slephen, legTamas this the .19th day ofM _
M CEXIM Clock of the County Court Ernth Countyg Texas By M // /
Dep4ty-
~
l mm TOTAL PAGE.004 **
1
. . . , . . _ . . . ,.+ . . -- . . . . ~ , . - . . . . - , . , . . . , .. , . . . . , _ . , , , ,,,,.
- - - __ a. - a' h
o .
1 l
l l
l I
ATTACHMENT 5 TO DAVE ANDREWS AFFIDAVIT ,
O t
_ _ _ _ _ _ - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - -- - - - ' ~
I _f i
j ~
4 NATIONAL ARC 111VES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION i o all in nilptnt flyene 1tresettis sijail route. (6rectittg:
By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Archivist of the United States, I certify on his beha i
er the seat ofthe Nationat Archives and Records Administrztlon, that the attschr! reprnductio l e and correct copy of documents in his custody.
. .jl' -l &iju)&i!N p <.:.a ,.
7 uun w un_n_.ar.
! . oa e - -
{, , ;--
Director
='
- - , = = =
8 d'- FEDERAL RECORDS CENTER 5"> / P O BOX 6215
.> FORT WORTH. TEXAS 76115 DEA FORnf 13040 (10-48) 9
- r _ - .
- v. ;, y
. wf., g UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT D NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS .
C.
FORT WO!'H DIVISION , o,py -@[h ;
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I VS. I CR 4-79-64 RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW $ S k?',h o .* . . y MOTION To HDDITY SDJTENCE ,, g t De fendant, RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, states :
- 1. This motion is filed undt.r Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, to modify the sentence teposed by this Court on August 17, 1979,
- 2. The Judgment and Comitment Order of this Court a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A, provides:
"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that said sentenet-shall run consicutively with sentence defen-dant is presently serving."
- 3. Defendant believes it was not the inter. tion of the Court to have the Judgment and Comittment Order read as 'tritten and therefore requests it be modified to dalete such language as contained in the said paragraph.
By Attorney, S
(M 1300 Sumit Avenue Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Telephone (817) 332-1172 Counati for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a . copy o'f the above . Motion *
.has been furnished'to the United States Attorney's office, 310 U. S. Courthouse, Fort Worth, Texas 76102.
- Fort Worth, Texas, this day of Sep+.er.ber,19 79.
v2 .
- y. .
e 1
,s e'
.. /, Un'ted S 4tes District Court '
NDP.filtfW DI$iltlCT or TEXAS f L -.11017-Wunni.D)vis10N- -- - - - - .
,af P L1 Cit 4ftD t. "illCKY" DDW CR4 7944 L----._ - -- ,,,,,,,3 poett e.o.1 1
.. r .te.,-.wn-,.,.-.,..,..v....-e............ .+ ~... .~...s..... . . . . . . .
. . w '.b. d h h,4 It't N @ h 4.a.M. O h h.h./'. i, I t,8 'M/ 4 ' ' 'tb I ' "'i ) , ! OIL!)
- L <4 s.. w .. -2 . . . . . . . _. .'.l** . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .'. l..8.I..4a.
.. . . . t . . . bi .
, in Ihv prtienst (f ths plicruty lof tht f ptcinshrnt 75U'H1" 4 *^ V *LY the (Isfendant appear 6d in f.er6 n ten this d,te d- AUCUST 17 19'/9 c0Un;tt JwTuoutc00Nstt no a.c u.. ...,i e..ha seteu.ai er ev i ie .....a .o e.tu euo.e, eseu..i seit...e
>L_ te io. so e,peinia ir .eo e-i ew p.e eer.w.ai u.e,... a e si.u . ive..ee er .....i.
t /J WilllCOUNitL L. Millc.o USc.ru, tous toa - - 4 ---.
J e.t.aa e ort44. .. a . -
t_ZJ CUllTYeand the couti being satiir,ed that t I N01.0 CONTENDt:stte i i NOT GUH.TY Pita p tre h a fattual ba616 for the ples.
g ' ' NOT CUILTY. Dsfendant is ditch.rged 7t.ese being a fir.dingknig,t of L.X J CUILTY. se to Count s 1 and 7e Ogigbu btegsgvjet'edes chig dof thEoffeme(s)i,f Conspiracy [' end BrOking and Entering Post M8*0"
- e . . .. $cctions
> 371 an Ib$ and Jl JWDGMINT a J .~ '. *. ,.
.,.... .-. ..~.. .f, ,.. .d a -
i
. . JJ l
. t ,- ,-,.,.3 1 t
+
j e ., . . ;
+ a g ;
, . te.e sevei unu ,hea.c setewani hee enphie. se ur **r Ivesmeai shevid aet 6e pisaevans. nmme ne sufrueni su.e se the seni.
. she.n, w appe.. d to the sevei, the soort edi.eced u e d.feassai svue, n .vg.s saa v ,ista sad woued ihm the d.reaJu ten 6, ..amenes s ihe e.nes, e she a ncaer ceau.i w we a.thwho espee meo.e tw teapeheimeni su a evied ofg a a en Count le and one (1) year on Count 7 to run concurrently with se enc c:
ttWilktt 08 > defendant is presently servint,.IT 15 TL'RTHER ORDERED that said sentence shall run consecutive triclAliDN cnDtn IT IS FURTHER ORDERID that on siotion of the United $tates Attorneye Counts 2. 3e 4e $e 6e 8e 9e los lie 12e 13e leie 15 and 16 of the in'dictmant '
be and they eree hereby digniiss,ed.
e
.4 . .g o, ' t. i* .. si i StitlAt .h . m . ... .
C0h billptll , j' /
pF s L ., . L,.;4.,'L.eg" .* } h'*{ Q FP.DitallDN
. mmm , ,h,h > ..i D.p' m,eM.W'.n#
~ ..
" PH L :t . .. . .... C'.Cip J
. and.Sh4./<fe.d46 G.'p..if
- t.D DlilC N At _
tDNtlilD.13 ' *JJ
- to ** 'f k **'d***P *"** l'arcad t,eis. li h hv.sbe mdered p..i she pari.I esadutaai of onetieu a ut evt o i."u v.< .u vt 'u.o i.'".i m'e'at i,'e ter.o=W."1' (**i m.v th.ar.p. Hisl..,now.uoas e ped.uwa. erome e e sin.4 it.e p.n J er 6.
hs.y it.We 4.ef,4 Ai HQ rg 47 elfit e.w .h. Hag
+i f ee the fl.a).11aa v.*tois.a Pf.4E,J e.a coat avre +Pp.es
- ei. 5 4.th4fl e .fft).i t.pp p i elpil psfiad of hte gs.f t g stmin J by i.e4 wie.i.
PfiDt.6110ft . , ,
h rihcouri tirderi curninittn6nt 4e the tusiody of the /.iherney General and tscunucendt.
ti h vested ehet ti.e ciut 8,.in e assilek4 sol y of elill(wJphs, "d '"* ** * ' ".e u t st t C!.'WT?.1:fJ f M 7,$[Kl{ ,*p *
' D41103
.J q
j' 5 p" .a .
t J w . . .. . .. . , .. +..
f) r
,f f,' { h-(*(A^~, ) f.
_J
~liAVID 0. CEttW, Jg. App,j._ . _gt 37, 3979
<_s ,mie. .. .. ~,e J
-: d~ h _.
, ~ . - -
se ~ , , _ , , o ~ . a 6 e s w. . ., u s., . . . . . e . ... , .
79 % civic. s.vv iG i
- NO M EtN DISTK1CT OF THAS ,
,, ggr.AT.!!
'='#,, aT I
$39 4 row FORT WORTT. TuAs ,
--- r s,es.st as.. .i 7
""'. i 5 o... .. . a. ***"**
Au ;;,,,,, , ....m... tea. ~ most
, o e.. .. . _ i :
, o a .., . . . . - ,
u , ,,, , e m e e w.*, a .* w =. a *** "" 'o3 u. ... aw. 4 o e. .. . vi. , CR-4-79-64 6 toee o! taill 'stter D.S. Treae Ck. , o , .,. . v .. ,., c.,,,,.,,..,.
j,"l,#' ,the ft restak.nWelv >181 371.1708.1705 & 2e p
, . ,,,,nr.
88 ..: 'O"""*** r y , , , ,, , ,, ,, , p
( % Q l C [ U. S fr..e.u.= 5c....s..u e o um.w mi .
. o o. . . . . .'
. . . . . .i o ,i .. , o 134018 COURT ORDER ., .a,. ., .. , ,,, ,, . .t
- us su wt oans novas awovat au anoi o nafie ,vingvino cowws.s t paio esey,c o e stamo..,o a.cointwawt pan ansas I 8N DPtN count -
A. anaaio usNt 6/ca etc. 2 N' M *
- g " '"
. o. evestitvtino,
.. .. . covas. . . . 6. con,.. .. .,,0... ,,oy,,,, na
- c. sai6 > aniwos *.*
i IKirr u xxxIr m . ' O.sawta=ct usaminos Bh1/?f i.4 8 "o
t eu su"e e , v. . w . +, . . m.c 30' * * "
un.4 ew . . .. . . . . ui . w . . 'a"so' cation ss ani=os 7 v
. .a 6. > w.u, rais i. e.- o. anaaLa covat sc, .e.,+ . .~ i t s u . ..u
.in .... i ee
..w e.i,
,,,,,,,,4, ,,,,,,, , , ,
.w teu .. .c. 4 . 6,.. . , , ,
my . ...n =~ u .4... .nu W1 th" to iYT f..
Tot AL *lN COURT
- HoWR8 1 d
- El h. $ 1 l 2 0.,
...,.......e.,.i... H OVt o' covat '-
r .n.,w pe A. Iht3*viles e coh80mtNC68 4*O.
..t a t
um-mi. ~...,. .i.....
.n.
v.ci...u... .. ..
.,0. tai . .. ,,y,,w,.. ,,eo,o,
,,,,,Lg,
.S,
,w.. . u.v.. t 4 u.. .c im. . ., .. ,,3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,,,.
..n,i...... o, i r Ao.
.grg, , ge
, , ,=vntieativs e etnea we.a= < a e
...c.-.....n...... . , . . . . . . . . . , ,, , ,,g.g 3.o
...w.i........... ,,,,,,,,
- v. u.. .o= ...,i. 1,,,,o,,.,.,.,,,aa,,v,,,6,i,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
i ..,,,, y
) g .. . A...g,. .. .. . . ..
7 70 tat aovt or count
- Houns Lj,ap; > a t __f 60.
,,, , , ,,, [ g Totat cour NtatioN SQq ajN count g gy, pp coumf* Tius >>g i2. O b m neuitsetxsNun....a.. i,. . , aut,n uu -
)oy3yx,ygg _t/o cau3 vo raeneee a aio e 4'/c r- c 35 .,c.,.o w
o.a,,....,,.....
,.c ..
"'MWNEPM*""
91--l
...o.....i....
...........m ,,,
og EUI.~. . ~. . .... .. . ....,,, e i ov. .m u. .. . .
- p 'j p j ,.) iofatettustso artNus >si d'A '
tovat cour:N5atioN & 4XttNstik > 4 . # 009 i
i .o .e y; , UR., otovet awove.es p un.
,m* a .. m =' .=. . ..' . . . . . . ... . m Lc Ah ,,n .
y ER.K t :vious6v eaio o anuc.e6s 4--
n,.., w 1 AMOUNT CLAIMf D > > >s a W*M.e u
o 88 avit asoy ,,
,, /N / ,) 9 79 , AMOUNT [",.",*#
$1GNATURE OF ^0""
$/
JUDGt /M 4Gl8TR ATI /Maj ( h, N4., k f/$ /9./ O O ID#17
, m ,,, snow ni or cous, avoot ^*'.***6 M y cDVP ' s 3a ptaLS k 'a '"a "a .""a
- " d ' """""** * * ** " ="* .o.vg-d v' ' 8 ' *
- d 8i u n
~
cov=ut d is . .i..se at{onmev eno.,,wo 332 11I2 is . v.N s t o e ,, VOUCHER
,_m .~ v ~ , , , o . . . . o . . o . . . .i . . , ,.., uUniR > 134018
. _,...a...c..,,0~o. ...,aioao..c.
at,on=t, c*a awiz atio., % AT TIME OF APP 0lNTMENT L,. Milton Haberer Ptg Ast TYPE OR L ,, Suite 714, 1300 Sumit Aveous PRINT CLEARLY THt NAME OF
- - e=- Fort Vorth. Texas 76102 ATf 0RNEY OR ORG ANIZ Afl0N (PAYEE) AND THE ADDRESS 10 aconess WHICH CHICK SHOULD
\ sincoes gg MAILED
. Copy 2- Retelried la co6st's teles
.* , ,, s e s , .<~...
/
HAR$HAL Jall 2 :sfM'19 NORJHERh OliTRICT OF TET. Al IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR[gggy ygg7g,ygxAg3 TOR THE NORTHEPJJ DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORT 11 DIVISION Ut11TED STATES OF AMERICA I I
VS.
1 CRIMIllAL No. 4-79-64 I
RONALD KOSH I RICHARD E, *HICKY" DOW !
THENOLA R. *T.R.* COULSON 1 HEPFAN WEBD, JR. I DOPATI S. ' CHUCK" REVADA I LEE E. WILLIAMS I . _
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AD PROSEQUENDUM TO: THL UNITED STATES MARSRAL TOR THE NORTHER!1 DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERITT, TARPANT COUNTY JAIL Pursuant to the order of a United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, YOU ARE HEREDY COMMANDED to bring RICHARD E. 'HICKY" DOW, defendant herein, now in the custody of the Sheriff, Tarrant' County, Jail, before the United States District Court at Fort Worth, Texas, on June 22,1979, at 9:00 A.M. , at which time and .
place said def'endant is to answer to the charges pending in the above numbered cause, and after the conclusion of all proceedings in this cause you are to return said defendant .
under safe and secure conduct to said defendant's original place of custody or other appropriate authority.
Signeo on thru cS/, /Y7Y .
V JOSEPH McELROY, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CLERK
'Ys .4 k:p.b >dgwA%
1E Y J h
l
. jf h. Nh& \ h[ bW lN :.$.e .
l--
(
United fk. ates District Court for
, , ,,,,, u ,~,u. .
NORTHE M D1$TRICT OF TEIA$ "*J t- ~ @RT-WRHl41V1910H- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ *'*
tt0AWT CK-4 79-64 '
I RICH /J.D E. t!!CKY" DW
-t Doc :a' *O W A L,,,
- PROBATIOlq/COM Q DAv 4$Ah
. [ a4ptein 7
in the presente of the attorrity (of the goverf. merit > MgusT 17 1979 the defendant appeared in person on this date toewest me sovri sdviud defenden et right to sovnet ud asked etiam defensat duire.1 se
- cyktti t e.. .e.mi .,p.im.d 6, m soci and u of.nuni m.,upon ec d amt.na er ,e u.t.
5 )WITHOUT COUN5tl L X.) WITH COUN5EL t Y.il.t om.lf d t. tar t ou Vametest et sevwl uiat41 - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ J <
i i NOT GUILTY L ,1NGt0 LON!LNutEZ, W GUltTY, sad the court being sathr44 tha!
htA there h a futsal tsps far (f>d W4
--- r*' l J NOT GUILTY. Defendantle discharged There t>cles a findsskr44 of i X , GUILTY. as to Counta 1 and 7.
' ffeni4(3)ht Cohhipef,$nd*trdki6g a Entering Pohtal
i.I.i ; .Og albei s.an _
(N d ih r d'o
$98...an, bett ege!in.vi61stion claTitle . .
I Q u',g.C. [', Sections
.. P Jai s.8 gpmg3 %o371 and 1703 and 2. o wt a . . rme 4..a. e.
u4.+. .m .. ag.4m.4 . .. .%. . .v...,,p;. .s g #
uw , . _ , p . 4. . f....,....a g, j, g.>
JUD..OMI,NI I , .. . . .. a . u ,. , i., i a,.h : a. . . . ,,b,
. v .w .. ...i.,
.,s ,
...n4. e ,...vt.. .v. .a. ., u. s.e..4. . .m.
er..a a.
m,. t.,
. u. a . , 6.e.
.,-o......,...,.,.t)
. . ..~ e i eu
,y , .;,y
.. .n .W,. . ...ui . % i , .. ..t. i., m .m,,an g. a. . ~ A
..n,
.i n
. n m i . .. . . . v. . .e,t
. .o. 4 o n .o , u .. t . . . e ,q...~. t o s ,.. s ..e,...><,o,..,. . m.. 4.
,c , . .v ,j .. L . .. ,..i .a. i. + . u .. . .a..,.,.t. .s,,<. 6 . , ,, . . .: , . ... . .. vte 3..E .- . . - . . , ,.. ...
.L La, . ,.4 .. o i, u , .
r .i c o ..t. . .i u d +w. 4 6, . . i v .
, f u w i sited ohnase sitposet t.ad e reing to se, eny lvesmini shovid met '
to prenanud. Deu*e ne s rta e at shton, er appet.ed M me 4eurt, the 49ert $divis:
, c.a.,c 9. wih t .d ,.p n.m.u.e e im i -..a v. . ,eriod o' f wr (4)
,e,... .eme.d is u.. u.iu, en m 4 years c'n CMat 1. and ont (1) year on Count 7 to run concurrently with senter.ce on '
Count 1. .
It t IT 1$ TURTHER D E ERID that said sentence shall run consecutively with sentence l
defendant is presently serving.
CRDER IT15TURTHERODERIDthatonmotionoftheUnitedStatesAttorneyh
. Counts 2,-31 +,"$f-4+B,--9 r10,"p;d12 '!137T4';"*15 kn5'16' M the i dRtmln't' be, and they are, bereby dismissed.
u . .o;d. .. .. o;o. . ,o u m,n:i imi ..m., ,m 14 ai
- u. c. .
.m.n .4.u , . .. . .m .d w. m. a n..,,;i~. .
utem . .__.__......_.._._oi..
"cI ._. ..~d I Id M . ._ . . ;na.o fit 08 Afloh
- .]AUB.b729 . . a w w.{'ty-Lw.. Ma.u.s
.. . . u.. , .. .ito L.DtP% ...eco n%ttna 1
_ _ . . e. h .a rM sciunt..,1,J
-_ ._n L . . ,_ . . l sendt:6 ens of probauen tot owl en the
.. . . . ~ . _ _ - _ r ADDITIONAt in 44doen se .he sesdai 6endihens of pretauen impo.ed above,it is he__sey ordered that the pensta. s tend C0%QlffChg posed. The Cou igg , 9 ,o,,,, i e.,,pi ng , , the perted of protketten. and si 3,3 , p,, ,gien,,, ,g e gg ,, p.
0F -) i psetria gn, tigim,deegang . ge.cien of tale.ju,dgment y,,im,ied er,,igra,u,rt ma,y s,tange,the itt send,.uons o,f prob,a,t8e,n. ts, PROS ATIDE
,coenen ter a .pp,ngwygdygtwe,p,,gn, ,,,3e> tHu b vi. i hwl:.4 c. 4. A i., .h.uini> wn.m.
The court piderl commitment to the custody of the Attorney Generaf and recommends. > W Clerk delivet 14 in orde.sd Ibal a ta'tif6sd Sepy of thit lvegmen, ai c E I* ~~b *u ~~~ ~ ~~~'~ ~~ ' ~~'"~ ~" "~~
CAT 10N
_ ill J s. .a . . a . , ,
>g -A o. -e - ,
4m o_e..
LAVID 0. BELEW, .TR. Augdet 17, 1979 8 l ca l t u 4. u.ew ei.
I 1
. - ., _- ~-- _ _ -
~
~
4 c
e.=:, :,z,
- FlLED yACTUAL RESUME AUG o. 1970.
LPHIACLh , JR., CLCM fDY BY M Sa UC
/, D*MY l g g3n no. 4-79-64 16 COUNTS: 16 U.S.C. S 371 - Co spiracyc - r 3"ge73gn; 18U.S.C.$495and(2-Torging, Uttering, h ani Aiding and Abetting, 18 U.S.C.
8 s 170B and 2 - Possession of Stolen Mail and Aid'sg and Abetting, 18 U.S.C.
5 1705 - Bre.aing and Entering Postal Vehicles and Aiding and Abetting, MAXIMUM PENALTY:
531,000 - 69 years, consecutive to prior State sentence.
FOR FLEA PURPOSES:
Count 1 - Conspiracy Count 7 - Breaking and Entering into Festal Vehicles PENALTY: Cour. 1 - $10,000 and 5 years Count 7 - $1,000 and 3 years MAXIMUM POSSIBLE PENALTY:
for Counts 1, ani 7 - $11,000 and 8 years, which could be made to run consecutive to previously tmposed State of Texas sentence of 2 years.
ELEMENTS OF THE OTTENSE: Essential elements which must be proved beyond a a reasonable doubt in order to establish the of f enaa alleged in Count 1 of the Indict.mont are as follows:
- 1. That the conspiracy described in Count I was wilfully formed and was existing at or about the tinte alleged:
- 2. That at least one of the conrpirators named thereafter knowingly committed at least one of the overt acts charged in Count 1 of the Indictment, at or about the time and place alleged:
- 3. That the accJsed wilfully became a member of the conspiracy; and
- 4. That the overt acts set forth in the Indictment were knowingly done in f urtherance of some object or purpose of the conspiracy, as charged.
TACTSt At the beginning of January, 1971. the t.'sndant, RICHARD E. DOW and Ronald Kosh, vbo werc then living at the residence of Kathy Perez at 7581 Hoochie Lane in Fort Worth, Texas, had a coraershtien during which they discussed ways of mahing mon *y.
During the discussion the idea of stea) Dg mail l
TACTUAL RESUME - Fage 1 l
l
- / ia s from mail trucks snd cashing checks obtained in
,/' this manner was discussed. Subsequently, on numerous occasions, during the month.it January, ,
1979, the defendant, RICHARD E. DOW, and' Ronald ;
Kosh broke into nine mail truf;ks in the Tort Worth <
area. The defendant, RICRAR9 4. "MICKY" DOW, and ;
Ronald Kosh subsequently met with Thenola R.
Coulson and I.te E. Williams at the KAACO Paint and Body Shop in fort horth. Texas, where a conversation took place concerning the disposition of checks stolen from the mail trucks.
Subsequently, on or about January 30, 1979, the def endant, LICKARD E. DOW, had a m6eting with Ronald Kosh, Thanola R. Coulson and Lee E. Hilliams at Willis Used Cars. Furthermore, during the period beginning on or about January 30,.1979, to approxi-mately February 2, 1979, the defendant, RICHAP.D E.
"FICKY' DOW, Thenola R. Coulson, Ronald Kosh, Herman Webb, Jr., Dorati S. Revada and Lee E.
Williams had several meetings at several locations in the Fort Worth area, including a pool hall at Bessie and New York Streets in Fort Worth, Texas, and had conversations concerning the cashing of r stolen clecks.
During the time period set forth above nine postal vehicles were broken into, and approximately 2,000 preces of mail were stolen. Some of the mail was ,
subsequently distributed by RICHARD E. 'HICKY" DOW and Ronald Kosh to other co-defendants, some of the mail was thrown away, and many of the checks stolen were cashed by RICHARD DOW and the other co-defendants. The automobile
'being used was a 1976 Dodge Aspen, red with a dark maroon top having Texas license number JDG 829, belonging to Kathy Peres. The break-ins stopped ,
after Ronald Aoth was apprehended by the Tort Worth !
lolice Department on or about Tebruary 2, 1979, while ,
he was attempting to sell two credit cards which had been obtained in one of the nine break-ins described above.
TLt!!EtiTS '.,F THE (FTENSE: The essential elements which must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in order to establish the offense elleged in Count 7 of the Indictment are as follows:
- 1. That the defendant, 'HICKY" DOW, did wilfully and maliciously break into United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 314108, or cause to be broken into the said vehicle, as alleged in the Indic tment:
- 2. That the United States Postal Service Vehicle
- l. No. 31410B which was broken into as atteged in the Indictment, was then and there seing used fer the delivery of mail on a mail route of the United States Postal Service. .
TACTds RICHAAD E. 'NICKY" DOW, driving the above describes automobile which belonged to Kathy Perez, and Ronald Kosh, smashed 1
l - FAC TUAL RESUP.E - Page 2 l
i e
m,
- 4 - _ - - . _ - .. _ . . _ ,____ _ _ _ , _
3- .
.- f the f ront lef t vindow of tr.e postal . vehicle, and removed a quantity of ina11 from said vehicle, on or about January. 30, 1979, in the Fort E) Werth Division of the Porthern District of ,
'< Texas.
' NR$011A1 i IIItiORY : h2CllARD E. 'MICKY' DOW was born on tiovember 23, ,
1947. i CRIT!!FAL
.. tECORD :
RIOllAP.D E. 'HICEY' DOW is currently on probation for a ten year period for burglary corraitted in Tarrant County in January,1979, l'
$7M US : Dett tant appears on writ.
4 i
t L
7 TACTUAL RESUC - Page_3 t' I
l l
t e ---y,*--y ,--,,,w, yv- w -W .,,r w v w r we'---et==- mviv- r irv- -----w w< m-w- w --r w - + " " = w- iv- r - v - < --- - 7
7N UlE V'41TED STATES MSTR1CTJOURT
'. TOR THE 130R1HERN D8STPICT OF TEKAS?U MdmCV' CW TORT VORTH DIVISION DY b' Deputy f
I M/.CISTRATE'S DOCKE! NO. _
, gyp ;TATES OT AMERICA rs. f l CRIMINAL NO. CR 4-79 64 RICMLD E. "MICKY" DOW HOTION TO WITHI,r.AW AS COUNSEL /ff .
. J TO THE HONORAELE JUDCE OF SAID ChURT:
NOW COMES MILTON E. MABERER, JR. , Counsel of Record for RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, Defendant, and would file this his Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record, and as grounds therefor would show the Court os follows:
1.
That the Defendant, RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, was arraigned on June 22, 1979, at which titne this Attorney stated to the Honorabic.
Court that he had not been retained as counsel by the Defendant, RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, and on that day the Honorable Court entered a not guilty plea on behalf of the Defendant, RICHARD E. "MICKY" D0W.
II.
Thic Movant would also show and allet, that he h'as reade no ,
additional appearances on behalf of the Defendant, RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW and that the Defendant de,es not have the funds available to hire an attorney of his choice.
III.
This Pavant vould also show that he has not filed and entry of appearance of counsel on behalf of the Defendant, RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW.
IV.
That to permit Movant to withdraw as counsel of record will not prejudice the Defendant or the United States, and will not unduly delay the trial of this cause.
WHERETORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, this Movant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to release him as counsel of record for the Defendant and discharge him of any further responsibilities in this'cause.
Opa s. Ta nta p s.n a & It a u t a s m
.n.........
.=... t
. ... 3 .......
- ., +4.= w... - em=.-w a - - . , . . - . . = , a-.e+.
[ Respec2fu1&y sube.itted,
- CVP2, TARTACL8A 6 HABEPIR sy, WM8 [ .
~
HILTOli E. nAEITIA, JR.
1300 Sumit Avenue Suite 714 Tort Worth, Texas 76102 332-1172 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
. A true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion to Vith' raw as Counsel has been c. ailed, postage pre-paid, to the Defendant, RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, Tarrant County Jail, Criminal Court Bldg., Tort Worth, Texas 76102, and to the Assistant United States Attorney, CERHARD Y1EINSCHMIDT, 310 U.S. Courthouse, Tort _
Vorth, Texas 76102, on this the 3rd day of July, 1979.
94' C /
HILTCli L. EALLFIR, JR. '
ORDER Dn this the day of July,1979, came on to 'ae heard the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record for RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, Defendant. that he be allowed to withdraw as counsel of record in this cause and the same is hereby granted.
IT IS THERITORE ORDERED, ADJUDCED AND DECREED by the Court that the said MILTON E. HABERER, JR. be allowed to withdrew as
~
counsel el Tecord for RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, Def=34 ant. > the above styled and numbered cause. .
i i.
i, 3UDGE PRESIDING
/
- * ~ ~ -W* mm . e, w 4
7
nnN/CTIJn
.' gUghtW "deth;psey,, 8 ]
IN Tilt UllITED STATES DISTRICT COURT f (*
TOR T11E NORTifEPJJ ,ISTRICT OF' TEXAS Jyg g TORT WORTH DIVISICH
. . , +.utg I -
UNITED STATES OT AMERICA 2 I I CRIMINAL No. 4-79-64 4' VS. I RONALD TOSil l F.!CilAFS L. *MICKY" DOW I Tl!ENOLA R. 'T.R."COULSON I llEFy.AN WEBB, JR.
1 DOFATI S. '"CHVCK' PIVADA I LLE E. WILLIAMS OkDER on notion of the United States for the issuance of a writ of habean corpus ad prosequendum directing that RICilARD E.
- MIC6Y" DOW, defendant herein, be brought before this Court for proceedings in above nurt.bered cause, The Clerk of this Court is, hereby ORDERED to issue a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum directed to the United States Marshal for the Northern District of Texas, ,
Sheriff. Tarrant County Jail, directinr' said officers to have said defendant before this Court at fort Worth, Texas, en June 22, 1979, at 9:00 A.M., and upon the conclusion of all proceedings in this cause to return said defendant under safe and secure conduct to said place of original custody or other appropriate authority.
Signed on 4 u vs e *) I /4r7,9_.
i ,
f
$ CE TIL~~3
/7f
[
.. . (/'
' u. 6. a:stQic? couQt hoRTHroN D.OtO@ oF M80 y FILED y mmm MKET "TXyfM'Il pervit IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT TOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION UNITED STATES OT AMERICA I i 1 VS.
1 ' CRIMINAL NO. 4-78-64 RONALD KOSH I
, I RICHARD E. 'HICKY' DOW I ThENOLA R. 'T.R.* COULSON 1
HEPJ1AN WEBB, JR.
DORATI S. 'Ch0CK' RWADA I 1
LEE E. WILLIAMS I HOTION FOR._ WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AD PROSEQUENDUM The United States moves for an order directing the Clerk of this **ourt to issue a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum for RICitARD E. "MICKY' DOW, defendant herein, '
who is presently in custody of Sheriff, Tarrant County Jail directing
( that said defendant be brought to Fort Worth, Texas, to appear before this Court on June 22, 1979, at 9:00 A.M., to answer to the charges pending herein, and directing that after the conclusion of all proceedings in this cause that said defendant be returned under safe and secure conduct to said place of original custody or other appropriate authority.
KENNETH J. MIGHELL UNITED STATES ATTOFEEY Cet ard Aao
' AlainN*
)
i s,chmidi.244M$
Assistant United States Attorney 310 U. S. Courthouse Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Telephones 817-334-3327 .
. .. Illt UNITED STATL.S DISTRICT C0!,
JOR TUC NORTHER:' DI$7t!CT OT TEXAS U.S. p0T ffy WORTil DIVISION n Or tb6E N J157ET Of TEb I
-l7 ED I ILACISTPATE DOCKET NO. -
v.
J01401979 1
} CA$E NO.
BjcHnDEMICKY'%[ ]E- dDEPUTYi Cg!HINAl. NO. CR-4-79-64 Jeltndst u! -
) i CRDtR TIXING DATts [J Jl . bU The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 (18 U.S.C. 3161 et seg), the rederal Juvenile Delloquency Act (18 U.S.C. 5036, 5037), and the Amended Plan for the Northc.rn District of Texe f or Athieving Proept Disposition'of Criminal Cases Dr. der 3.ule 50(b). T.R.cr.P.,
f a:4 the Speedy 1 rial Act of 1974 filed on June 11, 1976 as Hiscellaneous Order No. 77 ,
share as a co:: son goal minimities undue delay and furthering the prompt disposition of cri11nsi cases; to achieve these goals,'the determination of certain dates and'the measurement of certain time periods become significant.
- 1. NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXA$ ,
- 1. (a) Arrested Mguty United States Henbale en June _e.1979 et D-W Lirport. De f endant vo s admit tf d to He stiuLcn_Ane 10. 19?9 and diamfa..A _
e he 10. 1979.
(b) Arrival
- 2. Initial or first court appearance before Mat ettate i Heclinchey on June 20. 1979
- 11. FRottrDINGS CONDUCTED EY ARREST!NC DISTRICT
- 1. Arrested
- 2. Custody of United States !!arshal ,
a
- 3. Initial cr first court appearance -
4 Vatrar.t of Removal issued III. FRoctEDINGS 70 BE CONDUCTED BY DISTRICT COURT
- 1. Arraignment in your case will be held in the United States District
- Courtroom. 419 U. S. Courthouse, Tort Worth, Texas. You are hereby ordered to be present with your attorney for such arraignment at 9:00 A.H. on Friday,
, June 22. 1979 .
- 2. Trial Settieg - A tentative trial date is scheduled in your case at 9 00 A.H. on Honday, hil y 9 1979 .
IV. Defendant's Age 3/ _
Date of Birth c2 3 Od [ Y7 ENTERED this 20th dey of June , 19 79 .
. J' %
UNITED ATESMACIspTE g Your come will be handicd ey editiously, however, the Court's paramount interest a that your rights be full, protected and that justice be done in your case; should
,y time limit set afford too little time for you end your attorney to adequately pre-are for o court ypearance. the need for additional time should be made known to the aurt by cotton.
a
w-BAIL REftRM ACT FORM NO. 2 j
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ,, % h tg 00 2(sy4 .
Hmvreu - District of 'trui
&; ,(
TORT WORTil DIVISION he
,htgT
~
CltlHINAL NO. CR-4 79-64 U;1ted States of A - -ica '
Magistrate's Docket No.
Ofyg.
t Can No.
ORDER SPECIF : 1 METIIODS AND l K!CPJJtD E. "HICW.. DOW CONDIT10h 1 ItELEASE pefensant '
Part I Preferred Methe.de of Heleau DD]F* ED It is hereby ORDERED that the above named defendant be released, provided n ...
Personnt (x ) that he promista to appear at all acheduled hearings as required.
ftecognizance Unsecured Bund ( ) that he will execute abond' binding himself to pay the United States the sum of dollars ($ ) in the event that he f alls to appear as required.
NOTTa The Judicist eineer is reevired to telesse the defemlant by one of the above methods valens he de(tremines that sweh a teh ase will not res6eaWr assure the oppearance of the defendent sa ruevired.
Ir; the event sveh a slettereinstion la made the judicial emeer shall. witber in lies of or in addition to the abeve niethods of reh'ese. impose she nest con <tioon of release beted t.elow which wil. reasonsbtr assure the spriestance of ehe tson for tual. Af he smgle condiuen gives that assurance, ariy cosibmauon of conditions snar be used.
Part !!.- onditions of Releue i Upon Andlng that release by one of the above methods will not by itself reasonably as.
sure the appearance of t!'e ilefendant,it is hereby I'UftTilER ORDERED that the defend.
ant be s eleased on the condition (s) checked below :
Third Party ( ) (1) The defendant is placed in the custody of Custody (Name of persoa or organlaation)
(Address)
(City and State) Tel. No.
who agrecs (a) to supervise the defendant in accordance with conditions and 5 as enecked below. (b) to use every effort to assure the appearance of the defendant at all scheduled hearings before the United States Magistrate or Court, and (c) to notify the Magistrate or Courtimmediatelyin the event the defendant violates any condition of his release or disaprears. *
- c. e ., r e Restrictinns en Travel. Associa, (xshall(2)not 1
Thetravel defendan*
aeyondwill comply the_E_tste with each of the followirir of Tasas, withoutconditionsi tefendanL first obtainter
. "1 or I'lxe Vritten rettission from the Court.
IiTAt> ode i.
i i
10% Deposit
~~
( ) (3) The defendant will execute a bond' binding himself to pay to the United I
States the sum of dol lars (8 ) and will deposit in the registry of the court the sum of . dollars ($ ), In _ , being not more than 10%
t ., w of the amount of the bond, such deposit to be returned upon the court's determinaticn that the defendant has performed the conditions of his release.
- C.sh or Suretr ( ) (4) The defendant will exte te a bond' in the amount of dollars
, bnd ($ ) either secured by the undertakings of sumelent s;1 rent sureties er by the deposit of an equal amount of cash or other security la lieu thereof.
- 1Ns femt is not n boM ad bes not cre ite in the defed.snt or surely n bidUt ft%md.d oKgutkm to the (W:ed States The executun ofan Atpt.r.rwe kd(alirtzoxii)k necary "h .m c%ptUn to atItads
,,4 t
?
t s
( ) 0) (.) m d. fend.nr wi!! Le ,.te..ed fr m it i. *: en
.n s.ndai.n th i h. s.surn i. c u.i.dy et th. .s..tif.e d tim. .I 5.n r , . . ., .
..th pt. . .f ..nf.n.m ni .. ih. Unlie d si.ie. Mir.h.1.h tt d..;in.i..
hheeC ndiil n. (x ) (5) (b) % defend nl .e,.e. ihet he will .mply with th. f.llewir,r .tker condi.
ii.n..f rete..ei htndnLat*J1 WILALLuttniLivllLtdrit.d c f hD vtm3 Pv t e 9 LilL11HLtLittLihtEinu11er. int a tLit.
_DfndE9L1L11Lif tnu11Litu#1_LtIutaaLfDILnLijiltiLD: Y
_lua1. sittt sLitiinL1ini e., a.. . . 4..i. .. .# .. i. . .. . .. i. . . . 4 . 4 a. . i. . . . u , .e. . 6. . . .
s . . Twm. .., .4 ,4. i. 4.
it . i s . . . i. . i. . . . e . . . . . . . . 6 4. . .. . e . . ..a. . 6.. a. 6 a. , i. w. .. 6. . . 4. .
... . . . i . .i. . ... 6. u. .,.. . ,,i.. . . 6. .. o. 4 i. 6. . . n. . . .. 4...... .. . .e . 4 6, is . s. 4.. i . n . ,
.o. 6., . 4 a.
P.rt !!!.-A ppe r.nce .nd Pen.1tle.
i gppe r: nee . It 1. het.br TURTHER ORDERED th.: the defend.nt .h.11.pp..t n..: .:
4th9:h F1.ACourtroom. U. S. Courthouse, fort Worth. ia t h;te 22. 1979
.t x. r i.- c. . .Te . m.vi,
. d i uch ther p1.ce. .nd time a. ihe United si.ie. M.gi.t,.ie er c.uri m.y .,d., ,,
d.,.a
.n * . If A. d. fend.nt vi.1.ie. . y eendai.n of ht. rel,.... . w.n.ni f., hi. .,,e.i will i.. e imme d..ie ty. Af te r .n..t. th. i.rm. .nd conditiori. of .ny luether sel...e will b.
,. d. i.,mine J.
If the def.ad nt f.il. i. .ppe.r t. fore .ny ..uri .e judici.1 off. et .. required. .n
.dd.i..n.1 <rimin.1 .. en.y b. in.iieve.d ...in.: him. If the f.itur. i. .pp ., i. in .n.
necii.n wiih . ch.ree .I f l.nr. ., while . .iiine ..nience. ., p.nd.n .pp. 1 ., . rii.e . ,i
.fi., e.nvico.n. Ae pen.hy i. . fine of n.t m. . ih.n s ).000 ., impri..nm.ni f., n i me r.
ik.n f..e y..,.. ., b.ih iif he f.ii. i. .pp.., ti.e L.ine 1...e d n . mi.d.m...., ch re..
Ae pe n.tiv i. , si,,. .I n.i m.,. ih.n Ae m..imum p ..id.d for se mi.d.me.n.e ., im.
1 pr;..nm ni for noi m.,. th n one y..i. er L.th. 1 Peri fV.-Atka.whdem.nt br Defend.nt :
..in.wledgment "h "
I-
."d t..<.....
und.r.i.nd the m.ih.d. .nd condoi.n. .i rny vele..e which h.v. been shaked abov. end the pen. hie. .nd f.,feitues. .ppl...bl. In the e ent i viol.t. nr tendition er f il . .pp..r .. e.euir d.
1.s,ee t. c.mply fully with e..h of th. . bha ii.n. Imp...d on eny rete..e end te n iify th. M.gi tr.te .e C.urt promptly in de ev eni l ch.nge the .ddre.. indic.i.d L.l.w.
G uS . t
- n. y
. Mill 1*If.it Aetne 738-5099 Jt.re Vorth.
. .w Tesse 7613 6 ....
RE1J.ASE ORDERED: -GIL 4PML k. u. ii . . s . -- u . . . .. .. /
D. . : 'AO AU d Ul$ * ~ ~ " " ' ~*"
/)) f );i Y ,
TO THE l'NIIID STATIS A i AL:
- Your copy of th. Orwr 5p.cifylng Methods and Conditions of Releu. (B.!! R. form Act form No.2) consti.
tutes your authorte; for the commitment of the de fead nt until sah time .s.11 coridiuorts of relene are com-phed with. You ere .veon..d to proceu the def.nd.nt for r. eu. upon noufk.uon from the c5.rk or Uruted
$ ret.s m.ptrete th.t the defend.nt hu pcst.d bond, You er. directsd to produce the def.nd.nt b. fore th. .ppropri.te judge or rn.pstr.i. et the time .nd pt.e4 sp.afaed .bovt. lf th. de f.nd.ht is s tal in your cu.tody, i
~
L%Ited Si,ttes M4 wute o'
M ed Sw.n bs.ne +-A.ste l
l
(,
m i
at cl Def endar.t (Rev.M2) y,j.\h Litch Statra Bistriti Gourks .ggM,-.. w.
TOR Till; k/ '$ S -
,hll I
Q Tb '
IJORTitERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT FORT UORTit i,,
7, x - r.
UN!tra STATT.5 CF AttEA10A g ' @ s,2 y l
- s. m v*
No. Ch-4-79-64
$ox '"
g ;;! $' N-W D ,m, racnAro r. *nterYa row Q g 'E ic y 2 'd
- ', . C @ p g mg a . m p$.
h&
To' ANY U. S. }!ARSHAL OR ANY OIllER AUTl10RIZED OFTICER ' '
You are beinby commanded to arrest PlenArc r. *HICKY" tcW and bring him trthwith tifore the United States District Court for the liORTHERN Distt!:t of TEXAS
. the city of TORT 90RTl! charg!$g h lin to answer to an INDIC* MENT with Conspiracy, T1,ef t and Possession of Hall, Uttering U. S. Treasui7 Check, bistryction cf Postal Vehicle, Aiding and Abetting .
vlobtlou cf le vsc 373,1708, 495,1705 & 2
~
. i,, 1 $ ,.
t 2 tea at ..J.Qit.T.tiDATik.TfJ,6S.. . ..._ JDSEE11.tkELROY.,..JRm. ___ _ ,
.....M..a ... y 31. . . . . .. ... . .. ........ 19 .7 9 '
11 fixe d at S... . ...... . ......... N0"W"4 0881a8CT or iex43 Diputy Clerk.
RETURN FILED lo c in m Distrlet of 72:0 #S JUN141979 33 -
JOSEPld ifcELROY teived the within warrant the 12t.5 day of ,M'g/f f g//;/.UR.e CLERK TAY.D4 UI hTmDJ was pno (Umrtt at (,/9/n u QS ,wm;nnAs,Mgu,d executed same.,
..? T ..* ?.'# Nih.t??G % ..........,.
By . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . ... ,
se - k. a?,1' w it,r rt m mt, Tx
' latert dra:; nation of emcer to Mom the e-strast is is s. g.,
"any United States !!arshal er any othee
.erleed emeer"; er ' United States blarshal for
- District of ..........*; or ' eny United State: Ershal";
ony Speci.) Agent et the T+0eral tureau of Investigation"; er *any United $tnies )tarshal er any Special Agent of Tbletal Dureau of laveat;gallen"J et *sey agent of the Alcohol Tat UnlL"
... e is se se e ,.n e s e e ye, -m..,i, , + . - , - - - , - .w,., ,. -%.- _ - . - .,._,r. ,,.py-
I3IANfI UUff fl03THERN DISTRICT OF T3XAS AT FORT L'OP.T!! ,
Um7tr STA7t: cr AutAt A '
FJCimic t. *MICKY" D.2 No. ca.4 79 64
'fo' ANY 'J.
S. MARSHAL OR ANY OTHER AUTilCRIZED OFFICER -
- 2 You are hereby ec:=anded to arrest azeinto I. *r.: m Dow .
and brier hin orthwan before the United States District Cout for the Dhtrl:tHORTHERN cf 'IE.Al.S 2 the city of yog7 t,;0RTM to answer to an ItOICIMENT chargin- h im with Conspiracy, Thef t and Possession of Mail, Uttering U. /
S'. Treasdy Check, Distruction cf Postal Vehicle, Alding and Abetting ,
' ylolation (f 18 Us: 373, 1708, 4D5, 1705 s 2
.ted at ..JAS.T RATtL_TIJAS.
May 31
.....JOS EIH.ht:ILRQ4.JR- _ _ _ . ,
gg 79 Clerk. ;
Dy. h LLLl 0d. L
' il f.x e d at S ... . ....... .. .._.. .s ht& M -hd... ,
Deruty Clerk.
RF.TPRN
!JocE"_ti Distrl:t of m ss
- civerl the w!:hin warrant the dcy of 12th 19 and exe:uted same.
June 79 2AGC 'UE hTUCI WC D?:0 cm:Tl Q16/9/79 xa trwAmue, m , '
% " "-T,.tn n n~r ,9 ; m... . . . .. . . . ., ,
Dy . . ..
inse-t denstion c! cScar to whom the warrast is ! > # j't.h. %M.iENEp flDr%l e7.$ny other
,rimi emeer"; or ' United States Marshal for
- Dinrict of ..........*; er "aar United Sutes Marshal";
'sder41 bisau of Inse. ligation'*; er any a;ent of tlie Alc9ho1 Tax Ucit,nr Oper61 A;ent c! the Feder
,,T
,,, st- 9 3 4 7 9 8 91,4 3 9 6 $ 4 4
.s -'" --
m ,,: . ..
- - q; ..,
l
. T /
.a t, <J4 coy ,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO R N g$ Jg79 Eo FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT U AS %'R ,
FORTWORTHDIVISIfN. . , , (
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- VS.
- CRIMINAL NO.
CR 4 64 RONALD KOSH
- RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW THENOI.A R. *T.R." COULSON
- HERMAN WEBB; JR.
- LORATI S.
- CHUCK" REVADA
- LEE E. WILLIAMS *
-The Grand Jury charges:
Count 1 From on or about January 3, 1979, and continuously thereafter to March 7, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division of the Nortnern District of Texas, and alsewhere, RONALD KOSH, RICHARD E.
"MICKl" DOW, THENOLA R. 'T.R." COULSO.N, HETJiAN WEBB, JR., DeRATI S.
y l W j g CHt!CK" REVADA and LEE E. WILLIAMS, defendants, wilfully and knowingly did combine, conspire, confederate and agree together and with each
.other, and with other persons whose names are to the Grand Jury unknown, to commit offenses against the United States, that is, "
to knowingly, wilfully and unlawfully break into vehicles used by the United States Postal Service to deliver mail, with intant to steal, possess, forge an2 utter checks, money orders, and other things of value contained in waid mail, in violation of Sections 1705, 1700 and 495 of Title 18, United States Code.
It was a part of said conspiracy that the defendants came int.o possession of approximately two thousand pieces of stolen mail, and did thereafter remove the contents o2 said mail with intent to .
knowingly, wilfully and unlawfully convert to their own use valuables contained in said mail.
INDICTMENT - Page 1
- _ - - - - - - ~ ~
g",g .
g .. ;
/
/
Overt Acts At the times hereinafter mentioned, the defendants committed the following acts in the furtherance of said conspiracy and to ef fect the object thereof:
- 1. On or about January 3, 1979, RONALD KOSH and RICHARD E.
"MICKY" DOW had a conversation at the residence of Cathy Perez, at 7581 Hoochie Lane, in Fort Worth, Texas, during which conversation they discussed stealing checks from the mail by breaking into mail trucks.
- 2. On or about January 5, 1979, RONALD KOSH and RICHARD E.
- MICKY" DOW forcir'y entered a mail truck which had been parked at :
2906 Las Vegas Trail, in Fort Worth, Texas, and obtained approximately one hundred pieces of mail.
- 3. On or about January 8, 1979, RONALD KOSH and RICHARD E.
"MICKY" DOW forcibly broke into a mail vehicle parked at 1808 Las Vegas Trail, in Fort Worth, Texas, and obtained approximately fif ty pieces . '
of mail. -
- 4. On or about January 11, 1979, RONALD KOSH and RICHARD E. 5 "MICKY" DOW forcibly broke into a postal vehicle parked at the inter- '
section of Evans Avenue and Gambrill Street, in Fort Worth, Texas, _.
and ebtained approximately one hundred and twenty-five pieces of mail.
- 5. On or about January 10, 1979, RONALD KOSH and RICEARD E. _
"MICKY" DOW forcibly broke into three postal vehicles, parked at t
5705 Wedgwood, 4201 South Henderson and 2662 Las Vegas Trail, in Fort e Worth, Texas, and obtained a total of apprcxinately five handred pieces of mail.
- 6. On er about January 30, 197 9, THENOLA R. "T.R."
COULSON introduced RONALD KOSH and RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW to
- f-8 W
E-INDICIMENT - Page 2
((
=
E E^
I w
l-b
S 0).
LEE E. WILLIAMS, at W.ACO Paint and Body Shop, in Fort Wuth, T xas, and had a conversation about disposing of tiie stolen checks.
- 7. On or about January 30, 1979, RONALD KOSH, RICHARD E.
- MICKY" DOW, TEENOLA R. "T.R." COULSON and LEE E. WILLIAMS had a mieting at Willis Used Cas.
- 8. From on or about January 30, 1979, to February 2, 1979, RONALD KOSH, RICHARD E. "MICKY" DOW, THENOLA R. "T.R." COULSON, EERMAN WEBB, J R. , DORATI G. " CHUCK" RIVADA and LEE E. WILLIAMS had several meetings, at several locations, including a pool hall at Bassie and New York Streets, in Fort Worth, Texas, and had conversa-tions concerning cashing of stolen checks.
In violation of Title 18, United States Cooe, Section 371. ,
i INDICTMENT - Fage 3 l
l
' W p* '
I Count 2 on or about January 5, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas, RONALD KOSH and RIC11ARD E.
/
'MICKY" DOW, defendants, did knowingly and wilfully steal, take cnd abstract and attempt to no obtain from and out of United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 111180, parked at 2908 Las Vegas Trail, in Fort Worth, Texas, a letter addressed to Dorothy Meeter, 2964 Las Vegas Trail, 1260, Fort Worth, Texas 76116.
A violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 17 08 and 2.
INDICTMENT - Page 4 l
l 1
l l
' ~ .,* *
- g ~
Count 3
-on or_about January 8,-1979, in the Fort Worth Division v'
4 of the Northern District- of Texas, RICHARD E. *MICKY" DOW and
- RONALD KOSH,' defendants, did wilfully and. maliciously break open
~
United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 121484, which was then parked at '1808 Las Vegas Trail, in Fort Worth, Texas, which postal
. vehicle _was then and there being used for tho' delivery of mail on a mail' route of the United States Postal Service.
_In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1705"and 2.
T 1
F
[
i
, INDICTMENT - Page.5 t
f.
l-i l: -- --
~ = - - - -
l-
q) (/ ,
, f o
gant 4 On or about Janucry 8,1979, in the fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas,
</ RONALD KOSH and RICHARD E. 'MICKY" DOW, datendants, with intent to defraud the United States, did utter cnd publish as true to P04 dies Supermarket, 1837 Everman Parkway, En rman, Texar, a paper writing in the form of a U. S. Treasury check with a falsely made and forged endorsement purporting to be the cndorsement of Dorothy P.eeter on the back side of check No. 81,015,207, d3tsd D2cember 31, 1978, in the amount of $250.00, drawn on the Unit;d States Treasury, and made payable to Dorothy Meeter and the '
d2fsndants then knew the said endorserent to have been f alsely made and forged.
A violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 195 and 2.
f JICTMENT - page 6 i
v, %.
I
,/.
I Count 5 on or about January 11, 1979, in the Fort Worti ivision of the 11orthern District of Texas, RICHARD E. *MICKY" DOW and RONALD KOSH, defendants, did wilfully and_ maliciously break open United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 121675, which was then at the intersection of Evans Avenue and Cambrell S'treet, in Fort Worth, Texas, by smashing the front lef t window vith a hammer, which postal vehicle was then and there being used for the delivery of nail on a nail'roate of the United States Postal Service.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections _
17 05 and 2.
INDICTMENT - Page 7
. -. - - - - - = - - -
e' Count 6 l On or about Jatnary 30, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division s
( of the Northern District of Texas, RICIIARD E. *HICKY" DOW and RONALD KOSE, defendants,.did wilfully and maliciously break open United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 314075, which was then parked at 5705 Wedgeworth, in Fort Worth, Texas, which postal vehicle was then and there being used for the delivery of mail en 4 a mail route of the United States Postal Service.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections ,
1705 and 2.
l l
l s
. INDICTMENT - Page 8
~
a 'u Count 7 on or about January 30, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas, RICHAPS E. 'NICKY" DOW and RCNALD KOSH, defendants, did vilfully and maliciously break open United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 314108, which was then parked at 4201 South Henderson, in Fort Worth, Texas, by smashing the front lef t window with a ham:ner, which postal vehicle was then and there be.ing used for the delivery of mail on a nail route of 1
the United States Postal Service.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections l 1705 and 2.
INDICTMENT - Page 9 l
$Z '.
e Count 8 On or about January 30, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division r /
of the Northern District of '. xas, RICr'.ARD E. 'MICKY" DOW, PfNALD
/
KOSH and THENGLA R. "T.R." COULSON, defendants, did unlawfully
[j have f.n their possession a check numbered 3599153, cated January 16, .,
1979, in the amount of $15.00, nade payable to 0. Walker, and being
, part of the contents of a letter addressed to 0. Walk r, B16 Malta, g Fort Worth, Texas 76115, which had been stolen, taken, embezzled an' abstracted from the mail, well knowing the same to have been stolen. _
In violation of Title 18, U..ited Stater; Code, Sections 1708 and 2.
4 INDICTMENT - Page 10
- _ _ . - .- - - . . -. .. . . _ . . . _ . . . . . . . _~ ._
Count 9 1
On or about January 30, 1979, in the Port Worth# Division I
of the Northern District of Texas, RICHARD E. 'MICKY" DOW and RONALD KCSH, defendants, did wilfully and maliciously break open j United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 111180, which was then f
p rked at 2862 Las Vegas Trail, in Fort Worth, Texas, by forcing i'
the door handle open, which postal vehicle was then and there being used tor the delivery of nail on a mail route of the United States Postal Service.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1905 and 2. ,
i l
l l
I l INDICTMENT - Page 11 ,
l
s
/
Count 10 on or about January 30, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas, and elsewhere, RICHARD I.
~
'MICKY" DOW and RONALD KOSH, defendants, did unlawfully have in their possession a J. C. Penney credit card No. 412-$97-778-7-1, in the name of Mary Anne Graham, and being part of the contents of a letter addressed to Mary Anne Graham, 2900 Las Vegas Trail, Apt. 202, Fort Worth, Texas 76116, which had been stolen, taken, exubezzled and T
abstracted from the mail, well knowing the same to have been stolen.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1708 and 2.
l 1
l 1
l .
l INDICTMENT - Page 12 l
l I
1
~ _ _ .__ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . _ . _ _ . . . _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ . . . . _ _ , __,_...... _ ...._. .,.. _ _ _ _
Count 11 on or about January 30, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas, and elsewhero, RICKARD E. "MICKY" v'
DOW and RONALD KOSH, defendants, did unlawfully have in their possession a Master Charge credit card No. 510-26153-012-474, in the name of David Parham, and being part of the contents of a letter addressed to David P. Parham, 2938 Las Vegas Trail, Fort Worth, Texas 76116, which had been stolen, taken, embezzled and abstracted from the mail, well knowing the same to have been stolen.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1700 and 2.
1 INDICTMINT - Page 13 l
l l
l l
1 i
, . _.-. - . . . . . . . - . . - . . -..-.~.- --...-_.-.- .. -
I;r %.
Count 12 On or about January 31, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division
/
of the llorthern District of Texas, RICHARD E. 'HICKY" DOW and RONALD KOSH, defendants, did vilfully and maliciously break open United 5 otes Postal Service Vehicle No. 313659, which was then parked at 5501 Santa Barbara, in Fort Worth, Texas, by smashing the front lef'. window with a hammer, which postal vehicle was then l
and there being used for the delivery of mail on a mail route of the United States Postal Service.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1705 and 2.
i l
l l
l l
l l
l i
l l
l l
l l
l I
i l
INDICTMENT - Page 14
-_ _ _ . . _ _ _ . . . . --_2 ._;=_ __ _____;_-_ __ _
. ,_?------------________.
N-
/ 4 .d- f 4
Count 13 On or about January 31, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division
/
of the Northern District of Texas, RICHARD E. *MICKY" DOW and RONALD KOSH, defendante, did wilfully and maliciously break open United States Postal Service Vehicle No. 311098, which was then at the intersection of Hampshire and Rancho Streets, in Saginaw, Texas, by smashing the front lef t window with a hamer, which postal vehicle was then and there being used for the delivery of mail on a mail route of the United States Postal Service.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections _
1705 and 2.
INDICTMENT - Page 15 s
$) Qi Count 14 on or about January 31, 1979, in the Fort Worth Division v'
of the Northern District of Texas, RICHARD E. 'MICKY" DOW, RONALD
/
KOSit and HERMAN WEBB, JR. , defendants, did unlawfully have in their possession a United States Treasury check numbered 66,200,466, dated February 1, 1979, in the amount of $277.00, and made payable to James D. Baker, 253 Pimlico Way, Saginaw, Texas 76179, which had been stolen, taken embehrled and abstracted from the mail, v311 knowing the said check to have been stolen.
A violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1700 and 2.
ll l
l i
p INDICTMENT - Page 16
.. ~ . .. ._. .
Count 15 l I
On or about January 31, 1979, in the Port Worth Division
/ l
! of th* Nort.hern District of Sexas, RICHARD E. 'MICKY" DOW and l I f RONALD l'OSH, defendants, did wilfully and maliciously break open l
I '.iriited States Postal Service Vehicle No. 310515, which was then i parked at 4:37 Kearby, in Fort Worth, Texas, by smashing the front lef t window with a ham:ner, which postal vehicle was then and there l
being used for the delivery of mail on a mail route of the United States Postal Service.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1705 and 2.
i j
l l
INDICTPINT - Page 17 l
I l
I 4
i e., ,.,
d
,/
/
Count 16 On or about Tebruary 1,197 9, in the Fort Worth ivision of the Northern District of Texa RICittRD E. *MICKY" DOh, RONALD KOSH and DORATI S. " CHUCK" REVADA did unlawfully have in their possession a check, numbered 429252, dited February 1,1979, in the amount of $88.00, made rayable to Porter A. Harris, and being part of the contents of a letter addressed to Porter A. Harris, 3914 Mercury Street, }crt North, Texas 76111, which had been stolen taken, embezzled t.no abstrmeted from the mail, well knowing the same to have been stolen.
In violation cf Title 18, United States Code, Sections 3708 and 2.
A TRUE BILL.
- O_%" DAN
/rnl0
- 4 14' V
A EESNETH J. HIG)fil ff /
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
/
D KLEINSCHMIDT 310 U. S. UNITED SSISTANT STATES ATTORNEY Courthouse Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Telephone: 817-334-3291 IN.DICTMINT Page 18
\
i
2...atDANT RONALD KOSil DI CUSTODI- (EL 25-M5, ,
5 ~
WARRANT TO ISSUE Fm DIE *D.
FOLI4MDiG DEFENNLVIS:
~
os RIC11ARD E. "MIClJ" DOW
.$5,000 CASH OR SIIRETI Q Q g DISTRICT ~g ,
$ $M NM M
'. 1Matrict of
-$ TIIENOLA R. "T.R." COUISON FGT WORTil J)hg,gon
$5,o00 C Ass oR SuRerr -
.;.. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(. HERMAN WEBB, R . W.
$5,000 CASH OR SURETY j BOND RECGe m m m RmALD KOSH. RICHARD E. "MICKI" DOW. THENOLA R. "T.R. COULS':3,
[dj
'I HERMAN WEBB, JR., -DORAH 3. "CECK" REVADA, LES E. WILMAMS IX]RATI S. " CHUCK" REVADA
$5,000 CASH m SURETY
. .1 INDICTMENT LEE E. WILLIAMS 18 USC 371,1708, 495,1705 & 2 - CONSPIRACI, THEFT AND
,. - $5,000 CASH OR SURETI FOGSESSION OF HAIL, NU U. S. NY CHECK EmD REC N G DESTRUCTION OF 10STAL VmTmR, AIDDiG AND ABETIDiG.
f(- .
- (SIXTEEN COUNTS)
Q j dim Mr /
h Y e- - A7tY , , ,
,g,,, .
- v
, 1%d in open eoemet tMe day of J. D. B 1 n -
! l --
! ci~*. /
[ WARRAfff TO ISSUE FOR LIC3ARD E. MICKY",f DOW, TIIENOLA
- ~. p COUISJN, HERMAN JR WEBB,f."T.R" DORATI S."CIMcK" REVADA AND
(- * ,, \ LEE E. WTLT. TAM 3..
_TifirU Ul'Kl'E3 D1Plh ICT .H IIiGE'
. sro oca-4e2 MAGISTRATE NO. 4-79-46-M FD'DDE AS TO RONALD KO3H
. Aamm .,. , .
~
.3 (;.;~ 1c..
'o, t.,c :'?
i
?:
p 9.y. i : . . . r \.
- , . ~MA 4 -
't. ". ' : q .h t ..- - .. . >
p.LygNM,
.a B2:. si $N .c j<.
.@M % J- - . 0< l# iUN-f.'O;' 4J m:- a -
./ I g
e .m e 4. E n ea... m.m
(?.)- ;
Cornpisint
- r-
/' Ilnitch States D!Etritt Gourt i
roavHz
!. NORTHERN DISTRJCT_OF TEXAS AT FORT WOR 73 habt Magistrate's Docket No. 3/ - 9 9 UutTro STAtts or AussicA F\
Case No. n . m Q M SejIg_
d g COMPLAINT for VIOLATION of g RONALD KOSH'l cr g pc! 'ff4gpgS.C. Title IS
\
Sections 1705 & 2 4
BEFORE ALEX H.' McGLINCHEY Fort Worth, Texas
- .~. .t useumu ,
aw.~ .1 a.rw.n The cnders!rned complainant being duly sworn states:
That on or about January 30 19 79. at Tarrant County, Texas in the Northern District ef Texas, a
m RONALD KOSH, defendant, did m wilfully and maliciously break open postal vehicle number 314108, which was then parked as 4201 South Henderson in Fort Worth, Texas, by smashing the front left window with a hammer, which postal i vehicle was then and there being used for the delivery of mail on a mail route of the United States Postal Service. *
., And the complainant states that this complaint la based on SEE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT.
t And the complainant further states that he believes that Richard E. "Micky" Dow, Cathy Perez, Maxine Cannon
' are material witresses in relation to this charge.
)
W. F. nnings/ 8 * "'* ' */ c'- *"* '
Postal Inspe or, U. S. Postal Service 09e i Tm Sworn to before me, and subscribed in rny presence.[0 3 k$ ,//. k'".1 .
w= =.u- ~ --., .. _ . . . Al e x McG1inc[ey 6 *"d 8"'""*O
- - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - ~ -
-(y 1 l
+
, .q. l.. ,
AFFIDAVIT r Beginning on or about January 5, 1979, and continuing through April,'1979, your affiant conducted an investigation into the unlawful entry of nine postal vehicles. These vehicles were forcibly entered during the time span beginning January 5, 1979, and continuing through February 2, 1979. 'The vehicles, incli 'ng .
vehicle i 314108, were all broken into in a similar manner, that is, while they were parked on a carrier's route, while the carrier-drive, was walking his route, delivering mail. Between i fifty and four hundred pieces of mail were stolen in each break-in.
On January 30, 1979, Postal Vehicle i 314108 was being driven by carrier A. D. Carter, and was forcibly entered by -
breaking the front lef t glass, while said vehicle was parked at j
4201 South Henderson, Fort Worth, Texas, in front of a residence
\ occupied by Maxine Cannon. Ms. Cannon advised your affiant that she heard a loud noise, and witnessed two long-haired white males in a red automobile with a black top and a mud-smeared license plate starting with the letter "J", parked next to the' postal vehicle, pulling mail through the broken window of the postal '
vehicle into their automobile.
On or about February 28, 1979, Catherine A. Perez advised your affiant that she operates a 1976 Dodge Aspen, red with a dark maroon top having Texas License i JDG 829, and that this automobile was being used frequently by Ronald Koah and Richard E. "Micky" Dow, who both resided with her at her residence at 75B1 Hoochi,e Lane during January and early February of 1979.
Ms. Perez further advised that she had seen stolen mail in her vehicle and that Ronald Kosh and Richard E. "Micky" Dow had brou'ht stolen mail into her home.
On March 2, I979, I interviewed Richard E. "Micky" Dow who advised your affiant that on numerous occasions from January 5, AFFIDAVIT - Page 1 f
%$.5 '
{;jj %.
- r:st &! Defindent (Ref.742) Cr. Form No.12 Enitch 9 fates Bistrid Gaurt '
FOR THE .
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT FORT WORTit ,
UNITrn STAtts cr Autat A ' *
, N% ca.4. W 64 menAnn E. amcr Do" To' AlIY U. S. HARSHAL OR ANY OTHER AUTHORIZED OFFICER i You are heret/ co==acded ic arrest Alcur.o I. *mer Dow , and Nringhim fodhwith before the United States Distrl:t Cout for the NORTHERN D!stri:t of TEXAS in the city of FORT UORTH to answer to an It01CTMEtT thud 5d h im w!!h
. Conspiracy, Theft and Possession of Mail, Uttering U. S'. Treasufy Cneck, Distruction of Postal Vehicle, Aiding and Abetting
,in vlohtien of 18 USO 371, 1706, 495, 170S & 2 *
~
Dr.ted at . 7.Q3.I.)$3IlkIE.Td$ - ....r 3.QS@.b l.RC L . M _ .. _ ,
Hay 31 79 i
. Clerk.
on -- _
_.. . 19 Ey. ML f. A f A 1 M e.W. . ,
l Enli Axe:! c t S. ..... ....... , \
- Deply Clerk.
EETURN District of ss .
Ecccived the within warrant the day of 30 c.nd executed sarne.
By ............ .. .... ....._ .....,
' Ime.t draipation of eMcer to whom the warrant is issued c. g., *ar-y United Statn Marshal or any e*ber nuthc, rival oNer"; or
- United States Marshal for _ __ =.; District of ..........": or any United States Marshal";
or *pny Lrecial A::ent of the Federal Eureau of Investigation"; or *ary United $tates Marshal or any Spe:121 Agen* of the lideral Dmeau cf Investication"; or *any agent o! the Alcoho1Tas Unit.
s , .n s - e n . , e a . . , o n. . . . .
. , .m sn e m. g ,
j.} ~~
-1 l
CERTIFICATE Of OFFICIAL CHARoCTER = COtrNTY COURT l
- THE STATE OF TEXAS, '
COUNTY OF TARRANT. '
- 1, $ NL W u' Judge of the County et of said County (whlrb ,Is a CowtkiRecord>do hereby certify that .
bl4 N & :l' e' . I Y "
lA L/%..-
vuose name is subscribed to the annexed Certificate, was at the date of the same, and is now County Clerk in and for said County, duly elected, qualified and acting County Clerk of s , Cows, andfull (alth and credit are due to all his official acts as such.
And I do (wther certify that the signatee attached to the annexed Certificate is his iroper signa-twe and is gr .ine, and that said attestation is in due form.
.l IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said County Cows, i at my office, in Fort Worth, Texas this V day of 0W A. D.19 A W
.ludge County Cows, Tarrant County, Texas
- THE STATE OF TEXAS,1
. COUNTY OF TARRANT. ,
I, N'E4LL. ebR d4 % Clerk of the l f) t "
Countdyfo A t pllbCounty (which4 a Cows of Record 1, do hereby certify that o 6xmt4~
whose name is subscribed to the annexed Certificate was at the date of the same, and is now County
. Judge in and for said County, duly elected, qualified and acting County Judge of said Court, and full (alth and credit are due to all his official acts as such.
, And I do (wther certify that the signatwe attached to the annexed Certificate is his proper signatee l
? end is genuine.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the County Court, at my office un Fort Wor , , Texas, this F day of . l.
YN A.DN19
' y . . , ,
Clerk County Cows, Tarrant County, Texas.
-Attachment 6 to y g5 oui Dave.Andrews_Affidavtt ;
2 - -
3
_ i
/
3 .
/
3 4
1 4
s G "
I
] T O
~ H
(, G L :
R E
S A f 1 S
T N
C
}y_ !r A D.
m
{
D y\
U F
E D
VJ h@$
K e
s C
n -
e O3 b \
\
f f
O 2/0 C7 W
h\
f 02 2/
2 T1 F
EE HT TA D
E WN S
N b E
F F
O W ag t
n r
u o
$, g C
D k f: f tt t
e fo e v ' .
PD Y
s r
e G,
o b a fC o
i a h R
R dr .
f,.
1 y et t sQy m U O h r t r n '
n u f,w,i C 9 d t ot_ u M '
y C' ha p li m0 1 a
I (
J gs a t n n af u- u i
T 0r 3
y t nI ) u t
- Eo i) - /'.
9 f-5 i mI Y
{-
t
)
M I f ti m
a t
r e
c n i
r _
c!
y e,
s h T O
C F 1 y
^
] ;
t P
I t
i i n y b An e
tN n
-O c
n f E f D
N 3
t u
p e u
, ff A r
a r.
em CoN T yoT EM % D e
f.
] M m
C h i dom t av he ==
- a T
- d EN A
,. a- _'
T T
. a w
=
e.
t 1 in T. .
h NO Z
J UI B Y
- f. R - a d y s
1 - g et -
f rT t
S in l i e- i- S
's I. F d n ne fe t f wis MOYT amnt ee sh A>y
& T 1
l iO N
U y
tc n
uA on o
cmrx m
u o-rt ra ie s
6 w BC Ca d9 vT M g Yl 1 - ,
%1 - 4
. S 's uA A
E X ?),j+ uA T'
F O - AJ YEL 5 T*8 E
A Q
&] i -
T 0 E-S D L I,
E E F
_ H T O l lI ! l R 9 A 7 H
C
/
0 7l l 1 t
$' /
7 ?' .
0 t t A s : -!f
+ . ~ . . . .
- , _ . a etc.a - ,e
- Ort > tin NO. / bb THE STATE OF TEXA$ IN COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO
- VS. - OF TARRANT COUNTY TEXA$
}
M
- ENTERED- :19 On this day, this cause being called for trial, came the CriminMirict Attorney for the State of Texas, and esme the Defendant la prion; and the Defendant, having been duly arraigned, pleaded guilty to the informa, tion herein, waised trial by jury, and submitted this cause te the Court. And the information being read, the Court received the Deftedant's said plea thereto, and havieg heard the evidence submitted thereon, adjudged the Defen.
dant guilty as charged in the information of
) Q & 00 ' N and onessed his punishment at a fine of $ and 4 conAnement in the Tarrant County joll, togethet with all costs la this behalf incurnd.
It appearing to the Court, however, that before his trial herein Defendant applied to the Court in writing for probation herein, which application includes every veriAed averment required for such purpne by the Misdemeanor Probation Act of thit State; and it further appearing to the Court that the ends of justke and the kst interests of society and of the Defendant will be served by granting Defendant proba' ion in this cause, IT 15 THEREFORE CONSIDERED, ORDERED AND ADJUDOED, That the Anding of guilty herein shall not be Anal, that no judgme rendered thenparj+wd1 hat Defendant be, and he is hereby placed on probation in
. this cause for, a penod of %.MMfonT'fhis date, on the following terms and conditens, to wit: That '
he immed;stely pay all costs herein incurred, and that during the term of such probation he shalt:
(1) commit no offense against the laws of this or any other State or the_ United States; (2) avoid injurious f or vicious habits; (3) svold persons or places of dis ac report to the probation officer on one day of each month tetween the ,
e or harmful day and the d chge.#q day, between the hours of 8 AM and 4 PM and at such other times u may/be ordered; ($) permit the probation oNicer to visit him at his home or elsewhert:(6) work faithfully at suitable "oloyment sa far as possible; (7) remain within a specined place, to wit, Tarrant County, Texas, and not inovs e .from without leave of the Court; notify the Court of any
- change of address; (8) paysthe one imposed hertin act later than : 19 ,; and (9) sopport his
. depecdents.
The defendant is further or red to pay to the Probation Office the sum of 3- . covering cost of supervision; payment to be made on or before The Clerk of this Court will fumish the Defendast a certined copy of this order, taking his receipt therefor, as a written statement of the period and terms of his probation.
W7f.99 pW f-lor 97 /
ww
?
,pj// .ep .
l Qtd't.,Mernorandu.m Defendant's Recetpt Re Papble O , 19 Rece'wt acknowledged on day of entry thereof, one (1) certined copy of above order. .
Probation Expires M .19_
Court Cosw. 8
\ ~' C I Recorded Probation Minutes in VolfM /d'.'.P / 7 WW 8 84'**"
/
j i
3
.o a en a. m
.c,_ec e.sas +__ --
THE STATE OF TFlAS OF TAR M J 1, THOMAS P. HUGHES, Clerk of the Dutrict Courts of uld County of Tarrant in the State of Teus, do hareby cerufy that the within and preceding pogr antain a full.cwnpkte, true and euet copy of The Indictment. Judgment & Sentence. Probation aevocatiot. & Docket g ,
,7 Sheet escord in Caune No. Il411A .The State of Teus, Pialntiff.n Richard E. Dov. Jr.
, Defendant.
Given undet my hand and seal of office, et Fort Worth,in said County of Tarrant, State of Teus,this dey of October II AD.19 Uf 0 MAS P, HUCHES CLERK OF THE DISTRICT COURTS.
EX4$
%\(ARR4NT COUN%% N'%h%
THESTATEOFTEXASk C***8' Kd*11
- COUNTY OF TARRANT j 1. Judte of the Criminal thstrict Court 213th of the State of Texas, presiding in the County if Tartant, do hereby certify that the Deputy Clerk whose rume appears to be s!gned to the above cert!ficate,is and was
= at the time of Cgning the same, the Deputy Clerk of said District Court therein mentioned, and as such mas the proper person to make said certJ0cate, and that the same is in due form.
Given under my hand officla'J y this 4th day of October A. D.19 N Judge
,Cristral DISTRICT COURT 213th TARRANT COUNTY, TEX AS
=
THE STATE OF . TEXAS COUNTY OF.TARRANT I, THOMAS P. HUGHES, Clerk of the District Courts, Tarrant County, Teus do hereby certify that Geo m Kredell Judge of the Criminal Dutrict Court 213th- of Tarrant County, Texas,1s. and was, at tirne ofiigning the same. the l
' duly elected,quahfied and acting Judge of said Court herein mentioned and as such was the proper person to make said certificate,and that the same is in due form.
Given under my hand and seal of ofuce,at Fort worth,in said County of Tarrant, State of Texas,this _'Eh d4 of October A,p,gg 91 ,
THOMAS P. HUGHES CLERK OF THE DISTRICT COURTS TARRANT COUNTY, T(XAS Attachment 7 to
'. Dave Andrews Affidavit S$hbh3'k j
.. . . = _ - - - .
NAME RICHARD E DOW. JR OFFENSE BURGLARY & 211 EFT O/$10,000 ADDRESS RT 2 BOX Y- DATE 09-24-77J.F. NO. 43956
-FORT WDRTH TX ----- I.F. LEWIS RAY WILSON RACE - WSEX M AGE 29 D01) 11-23-47 C.C. (0121572 CASE NO. 0121573 FILED: (DATE) 09-30-77 A0ENCY FORT WORTH PD TRANSFERt COURT- DATE OFFENSE NO. 77-C-3061 COURT INDICTMENT No. 11411A
.IN THE NAME AND BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
THE GRAND JURORS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, duly elected, tried, empaneled,
.swcrn and charEed to inquire of offenses committed in Tarrant County, in the 0 tate of Texas, upon their oaths do present in and to the EEIXi'KEI District Court No.__ _213. of said County that * * * * * * '
RICHARD E DOW JN hereinafter called Defendant, in the County of Tarrant and State aforesaid, on or about the 24THday of SEPTEMBER 19 77, did 1 HEN Ai!D 1HERE KNOWINGLY AND WITHOUT THE EFFECTIVE CONSENT OF LEWIS RAY WILSON, 1HE OWNLH THEREDFi ENTTR A BUILDING NOT THEN AND THERE OPEN TO THE PU14LICs WIll INIEN1 TO CDriMIT-THEF14 COUNT lWO! AND Il IS FURTHER PRESENTED IN AND .TO THE SAID COURT THAT RICHARD E DOWi JR.s IN THE COUNTY OF TARRAN1 AND STATE AFORESAIDs ON OR ABOUT 1HE 24TH DAf UF SLPTDiFER, 1977i DID THEN AFD 1HERE INTENTONALLY AND KNOWINGLYi WITHOUT 1HE EFFECTIVis CONaENT OF LEWIS RAY WILSON, THE OWNER THEREOFs ENTER A HAltITATIl nND bib =n11EMPT 10 COMMIT AND DID COMMIT THEFTS L JN I 1HREE: AND IT IS FURTHER PRESENTED IN AND 10 SAID COURT THAT THE SAID 1 RICHARD E. DOWS JR.s IN THE COUNTY OF TARRANT AND STATE AFORESAID, ON OR fBOUT THE 241H DAY OF SEPTEMBERi 1977, DID THEN AND THERE KNOWINCLY AND INTENTIONALL1
- APPRUPRI ATE PROPERTYi OTHER THAN REAL PROPERTY, TO-WITi A COIN COLLECTION, OF THE VALUE OF MORE THAN Si0iOOOi FROM THE OWNENs LEWIS RAY WILSON, WITHOUT'Ti EFFECITVE CONSENT OF THE OWNER AND WITH INTENT TO DEPRIVE THE OWNER OF THE
- PROPERITi.
AC&tIP Widi 7 AIT1'T:
Q b d 19 TEWh r. h"JMS Cri I Dis q. t ci nk aat ,C ntb Texas EL E_. C C Deputy Filed (Clerk's use en1.
FILED DISTR:CT COURT ha 213 TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS OCT 161977 J. W. %N an AGAINST TFJE PEACE AND DIONITY OF THE STATE. DF ' - - - - - 0"*
l
,Q
, . ; ;w (p (.L/ M ~
Crimina? District AttWrney
'W4s) /n/JJ e 1
~ Foreman 6f e Orand Jury
77 tlc,STATC OF TEXA$ IN TilC: Eft W1 M: DISTRICT t5, NOx W 11^ COURT _ - HLMBER Tol!R Ol'
'11CBARD E D2ti JR- TAHilA?fr COUNTY, TEXAS ORDER SE1 TING CONDITIONS OF l'ROIIAr!ON Dets of Entrr haviry 16th.1978 Defendard Richard E. Dow. Je g_,
- i Penldt g Judge H o f', , Cordon Gray 4 +
Attorney for State ! CritnJnal District Attorney . U,qfagry '
Attorney for Defendant : Rgig,tt,,,fg gign Offsusi ! ByIAlay/
PrM.loary Terrn m t Ten (10) Yeara ce
' pmd ulhis der,6be.e shnu'in eren the court eene:dmd eeu.t.)Se the tenne Defendiet the u eeed.uene el stese etterner bw t ret.uen in ame rae dat.endant,i ne and the attorner ameni ter thetmicere of cervituen state, sp.
ente Emini and the Cesst talry of the ettalen that euch terms and eendetwa cheul 6,e eu 6 to Se supervisten of the Court threvg the My appointed arid atterg Directer of Advil Presuen of Terrant Courity, Tesset 1414 therefore QRMRE ginnittg en the date of entr7 by the Court udrtetet bereiathat und the i theDefendant typervien 1.e,en el t>e Court, through he Director of AduJt Probation of Tarand to breby placed en probatten tant Ce46ty,7amas, edject to t fetewing teres an cent.ueces riarcely, tw dusteg the term of tMs pret,atten, the Defendant absti a Ceaunit no effense egalAst the 1swo of this Blate er up other 8 tab of the bnPad Statas;
- b. Avdd tr,furtene er vieleus habitat
- a. Aeld p* sons trid pieces of $mputable er hant.ful sharatters
- d. Ittpert le the Aduh Prestien Of!ker of Tarrant Cnntr, Tense en tha iSth derer .
E nHAE.)f - , 1b7A - and es the 1/dh day of each snenth thereafter, during Treteuen; e, Parmit the At,uf t Protation Office / te visit you si your home er elsewhere; - ,
- f. Werk faithfuuy at suitable emplereent sa far as possibles -- *
- g. Remala erithin the tunits of Tarrant County, Teams, utdess steen prmhalen by the Tartar,6 County Adult Presuen Ouker to lean therstress; L 8vpport year dependuts;
- 1. Het!.fr the Adult Prvbaties Offleer of Tarrant County, Teams,if your addnas or emplerment le chuged, Mthin fio, days from the date of eJ.ange J. P:t to and through De Adait PrebeUen Offire, of Tartarit Coonty, Tesas, the telleWegi
- 3. CotJRT COST 8 la Lle a:neunt of L.AO.00 at the rate of $1 00 per ,,,,,,,_inant h ,
the first perment to 14 mace oli the. 16th dar of_._ February 167A . and a like nym ut en the _ 16th gey ,f suh month theruf ter util full pa ent le made:
- 1. PJtoBATION Trt in the araunt of $ 10_00 ,,,,, en the . 6eh . . of _ Feb ruary 1tLR.,
c d on the 1 Ath.._ day of each renth tiernfter during redation:
- 8. RESTITUTION in De eineast of a 20.0 1 00 .4 the ,.te of g, ,,.1031 Dft.,,, . ,, p r ___nonth ,
the first seynent to te made en the _1 Ath . day of : Fa h e um ry ,,, ,- .,t JR . ud a tiks prment to the . 16th . day of ese.h month thereaher ut!! fuD psyuent is o o
- 4. FLYC in the an.nnt of 8 as the rete of 8 : . Mr -- - .u the first NTment to be anale en tie dar of -- . d, - . sad a like psyrnent er the _ day of each snenth itereafter until full payment is made.
k Suben!t to a perled of detenties in the County Jail of Tarrant County, Tuas, to serve a ters of Leprhor6 ment of -
I days, to begin en the _ der of - 15 m m
4 I-
. The Cisrn of th's Court wit! turWah Defradant siepp et tb abe terme sad endiucne and note the date of delivery of nth cerF er the dechet, sanw.zware i > Teetartsst m Net lese tun the initdr.rm prescribed for the effense cier enere then 10 pars (Sec. 8. Att. 41.12, C C.P.,
tot Not to esteed 30 dan er one third of the sentente, whichever is lesser, tu Mitioul tertrs r,ar tie eddet -
j CereeM 1m Tme t't wta' 1mi rm L
I g e--w -,.pe -. _g. gp s. y .p. p-m- - a w --.--y----r'-g9- - - , - - ' - -*--- w-m -e-wv m --e-+-ee-+-e-+----p-w%y4,----e--g+---- + r y-- T'-
.. . . . . . . . - =. . - . - - - - .- - . . . . . _ _ - -- . . . . - .- - -~-. .-.- -
o l' YS, NO-
. ll M CitARD E DOW JR j'
.i onDtn i
h Date of thisofOrEntYer i E ttr I
t l
{ Defendant 1 Ric f JudrePrestoler i por i
Attorney for Etate to i Critninal Distr Atierney for Defendant t Fro Date of fwbation order t_ .t a r Tra.nsfer tu *t Jy Durttlen of Probatler:aperfM i il Date of Violation' t Jan Original Terfn of Imprisonment Arsated tu 1 )CCC(MLitt)
Itectuttlen of Impthonment
~l -
Allowed by Court u> t Iteg
?
i Tervn et frnprisonment f Not Less The Paragraph of Probation Order Alleged Violated H' : One
.$~
g Grounds for fieventien H) t -1.
-f , take and abstrat j of United stater as stated in Stt I
i 1'
I h
u 1
f.-
I i
On this day, set forth abete, the Motton of the 8 Tesa.s. hr its a ove rammed atterne and the Dettedan mouved aady er heaHr the De ndant hav> been I
lations of taragrapha of n e probation erster of I e Cout 1- late, and bearmg the evidepre affered by both the State
- l. tad er thst since the time Defendant was rdated en pre
!' - )eferhr.t has viniated the tetwa and senditlens of as I
said pabation shevid be revoked:
l . And wb*n shown above that a reduction of Irnyn intertst9 el avlety amt the probatieaer would be served c
meet originnhv estessedt It is therefore CONS 10ERED y the Court that t
- thtient of prehstion in this ewse in a snavnet set fort ,
' Defer. dant en Probation heretofore entered in this esua6
- Court that the hfredant be now sentenced herein,in er with this order.
l, 1 - to $how came and title of prossester.
}i (H $how *Nene* et show casse atmber, district eoort at 1 (H obtain hotshment frem erfrical judgment placing .
to show None" or show " Reduced years",
ts show paragraphs of original probation erder mame l- ' fu Reelte the grouerfs samurced by the Court se the e o w ,ysw.e a.m ma,vwwmawwe mw -
by hk l
w -
--or - y .---r-- c.,v.s .. , - ~ - , . - - - --,,,, , - . . . , ,r-,, -- -.r,-- i y, . ,-- , - . . -- - - ww
CRIMINAL DOCKt.t -t = =.
- 1
' ( p, -- .. t?f5i;
.% g THE STATE OF TEXA5 ,
? '5-Tid uwY pe ou;4 2. Y '/ Te ri( - !* O T* ** *
- 'ij;
[
AICHe.RD E 00w JR wt - C F F Erd t! Jais 09/24/11 t /> ' t' */ *C Uc CC 4
Frank McCown .
! Date c,9 Orders of Court
" *, /,4
-Ordees -' -
. . s..._, -
10/1 d/ 7 7 1 *431 C T M *4 T E E T U";4c; ANJ cap! As ORGEoEG. ouNJ sci Ai h0doJ - . - . - _ _ _
OCT 19 1977 .,m, u .._. _ .: n.-~ f y . . . . ._ . . _-
DEC 1319771 -- - ~ ~ - c- - -
o..
, ,, ' .. ::j /.,
0 1-6-78 Pre trial, no motions. . -
~
M6-78 Defendant waiveJ .u.i r uu, Walter of jury filad. Esf*3h at, aftr- toi SC h ";- " 7_ .. .ZC,', ,
nr ad, entered plea of
. 67i.W t:sfore taa Cr.a.-C. Artar hes:-leg the guidence. the Court found defendant gulity and assessed his punish:2ent at -i * - years in the Texas Department of Correct 1';ns. Judgment. _ _ _ _ . I
- ferm tttr -e _..___ , A CPJIT!r[p COPY; f l
- n l _~M#~ years und h te a p
ad on Probation for ATTCT:. M h bW.1911 UP M_ %M W hm ef g
t Probattnn m r.r__ g _j _. 9 n m , , um The Conditlocs of hobati were a en the Defen - MEu te ms. Cdstpal Matrict Clut f Tarrant Cmn*S Trm '
UC2 b3.Taining agrCefnent foffn.va. M k _ did ~
Art.26;1.3 No M5t of mm
! 5-1-79 h Petition for revodation*flFEd warrant tasued i '5-4-79 l Petition to revoke dismissed, recall warrant 6-11-79 i Petition to revoke probated sentence filed, warrant issued 7-20-79 I Hon Frank McCpwn appointed as attorney 3
.9-7-79 I Petition to revoke Eranted. sentenced to Not less than 2 years and not inore than 4 year:s in the Texas l Department of Corrections, concurrent with federal CR4-79-64, Crddit 9-3J-77 to 1-16-78 6-20-79 to 9-10-79 .
8-12-80 Order Granting Defendant Credit for all time spent in Jatt while in A ho'siliat !
, i e I
a l
/ I
/
" YW/] 1 ,, i
- l /[ N/
mr.
i : . .
. - ., rt ,o. d ;
es ,,
5 EEr=IE
. F T::
. .
TUSERVICES o wt.4.*,
o.m av ,, cm , san, i
April 8, 1991 Mr. Mickey Dow 586 N. Clinton Stephenville, Texas 76401
Dear Mr. Dow:
1 Through our meetings on March 22, 1991 and April 1, 1991, it is our understanding that we have now learned from you, and from those you have identified as your " clients," all concerns that any of you have relating to the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station.
As you know, we are currently investigating any concern not e previously investigated and resolved and intend to take appropriate action should our investigation determine that the previous investigation was incouplete or that further action is warranted. Furthermore, we have advised the Nuclear Regulatory commission of any such concerns that might relate to activities which that agency rcgulates.
In our meetings, you have indicated an interest in discussing with company representatives the settlement and negotiation of your
" clients'a claims.. Since you are not licensed to practice law in this state, we do not believe that you have the authority to represent, negotiate, or enter into binding obligations on others behalf. We thus cannot and will not engage in any such discussions with you regarding the claims of others. Additionally, our lawyers have. advised us that to engage in such discussions might be improperly aiding in the unauthorized practice of law.
We will, of course, listen to any further concerns you might have about Comanche Peak and act appropriately thereon. We will also' discuss any claims of the individuals you have claimed to represent,-either directly with them if they so desire, or with a licensed attorney of their choice. We continue to encourage you and tho;e with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or you are working with to discuss any concerns you may have with any other appropriate state or federal agency, or with SAFETEAM.
- Attachnent S to
- N Ne Lau om .reiunmi
t.
Mr. Mickcy Dow April 8, 1991
. page Two Rugarding your possession of TU Electric i s property, specifically the telephone tapes, we again request that you immediately return them to the company, where they will be safely c.aintained during the pendency of any claims that may relate to them. Your continued withholding of this property is not legally justified and hampers our ability to investigate fully your claims about them. Should your refusal to return these items be based I upon a mistaken belief that they will not be properly cared for, we encourage you to place them in the custody of a local law enforceaant agency near the plant for safekeeping, and with the express understanding that ; hey will be accessible for investigation and review by the .ompany and any regulatory agency, .
including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, during the pendency of any, claims.
Very truly yours, e .
David L. Andrews
~
S 9
m
_. _._ -s. _ - - - -