PERRY NATHANIEL PETERS, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could properly infer knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the bill passed.
Peters was convicted of passing counterfeit United States securities. The sole issue was whether there was sufficient evidence to infer knowledge of t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Inference Of Knowledge cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Peters was convicted by a jury of passing counterfeit United States securities with intent to defraud in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 472. The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could properly infer knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the bill passed. Ruiz v. United States, 5 Cir., 1967, 374 F. 2d 619 [Mar. 24, 1967]. The verdict of the jury must be sustained if supported by substantial evidence, including reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, as viewed in the light most favorable to the Government. Glasser v. United States, 1942, 315 U.S. 60, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680.
We conclude that the record amply supports the jury verdict. Peter’s asserted lack of knowledge ignores the testimony of Claude Beck, Jr., a witness for the Government who had recently been convicted of dealing in counterfeit obligations that were part of a printing known to Federal agents and to which the bill passed by Peters had been traced. Beck testified that within two months prior to the incident for which Peters was convicted, he had sold counterfeit twenty-dollar bills to Peters, indeed that Peters was allowed to thumb through the counterfeit bills in order to select “the best ones he could find.”
Based upon this testimony, which was clearly admissible, the jury could properly infer that the requisite intent had been established. The District Court was careful in instructing the jury concerning the weight and credibility to be accorded the testimony of the accomplice Beck. We find no error. Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
United States v. Orange Jell Beechum, 582 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1978)
-
Tillman v. United States, 406 F.2d 930 (5th Cir. 1969)
-
Posey v. United States, 416 F.2d 545 (5th Cir. 1969)
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 (U.S. 1942)
- Ruiz v. United States, 374 F.2d 619 (5th Cir. 1967)