This cause came on to be heard on the record on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and was argued by counsel.

Although the delay between the time of some of the offenses and the time of the arrest was substantial, the testimony of the defendant-appellant demonstrated his ability to recall the details of the transactions, and thus tended to negate prejudice from the delay; and moreover, the sentences imposed were concurrent, see Hirabayshi v. United States, 320 U. S. 81, 63 S.Ct. 1375, 87 L.Ed. 1774 (1943); and the court concludes that no error occurred affecting substantial rights, it is

Ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the District Court on appeal in this cause is hereby affirmed.

ORDER

Before Bazelon, Chief Judge, and Fahy, Washington, Danaher, Bastían, Burger, Wright and McGowan, Circuit Judges, in Chambers.

On consideration of appellant’s petition for rehearing en bane, it is

Ordered by the Court en bane that appellant’s petition is denied.

BAZELON, Chief Judge, would grant appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc. See his dissenting statement in Hardy and Ferguson v. United States, 119 U.S.App.D.C. -, 343 F.2d 233.

WILBUR K. MILLER, Senior Circuit Judge, prior to his retirement on October 15, 1964, voted to deny appellant’s petition.

FAHY and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges, would grant appellant’s petition.