Legal Custody by Attorney General
The courts have held that escape from a local sheriff and the
jail where defendant was detained in custody under process issued by the
States Commissioner (now magistrate) was a violation of this section.
United States v. Stead, 528 F.2d 257, 258 (8th Cir. 1975), cert.
denied, 425 U.S. 953 (1976); Credille v. United States, 354 F.2d
653 (10th Cir. 1965).|
A defendant who escaped from a federally approved prison detention
center was properly charged under this section. Milhouse v. Levi,
F.2d 357, 361 (D.C. Cir. 1976); United States v. Allen, 432 F.2d 939,
(10th Cir. 1970). Courts have likewise held that a defendant who left a
house without permission, or a defendant participating in a pre-release
who willfully violated the terms of his extended confinement, committed an
within the meaning of this section. See United States v.
634 F.2d 1092, 1094 (8th Cir. 1980); United States v. Jones, 569 F.2d
500 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 908 (1978); United States
Taylor, 485 F.2d 1077, 1078 (D.C. Cir. 1973); McCullough v. United
States, 369 F.2d 548, 550 (8th Cir. 1966). The escape statute does not
punish an escape from state custody even though the escape took place on a
federal reservation. United States v. Howard, 654 F.2d 522, 525 (8th
Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 944 (1981).
An escape from incarceration pursuant to the civil contempt
28 U.S.C. § 1826, is an offense under 28 U.S.C. § 1826(c)
an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 751. See this Manual at 1822. When the prisoner is also
a criminal sentence which is suspended for the term of the civil contempt
confinement, the prisoner's reversionary status as a prisoner on the
conviction may provide a basis for an escape charge under Section 751.
no law on this issue currently exists.
[cited in Criminal Resource Manual 1812; USAM 9-69.500]