Receiving Stolen Property

390 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Gallucci v. State
  371 So. 2d 148· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-03-21 ·cited 45×
  A trial court may not impose a greater sentence on a defendant because they exercised their constitutional right to a trial by jury.
• Tidwell v. State
  143 Fla. 397· Fla.· 1940-06-18 ·cited 44×
  Tidwell and Welch were convicted of receiving stolen goods (a boat motor) under the second count of an indictment that charged them in the alternative with both larceny and receiving stolen property. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed their conviction, holding that the trial cour
• Harris v. State
  53 Fla. 37· Fla.· 1907-01-01 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for receiving stolen goods because the jury's verdict was legally insufficient. The verdict failed to include the essential element of the defendant's knowledge that the goods were stolen, rendering it a nullity upon which no legal
• Urquhart v. State
  211 So. 2d 79· Fla. 2d DCA· 1968-05-29 ·cited 42×
  William Urquhart was convicted of buying, receiving, or aiding in the concealment of stolen property based on evidence including items found on his person and in the home where he rented a room. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction, finding two independent
• Kitchell v. United States
  354 F.2d 715· 1st Cir.· 1966-01-05 ·cited 42×
  The court held that while the evidence was sufficient to convict Kitchell, prosecutorial misconduct in remarks about unused evidence warranted a new trial for the other appellants. Kitchell's confession was admissible as he was properly advised of his rights.
• Winer v. United States
  228 F.2d 944· 6th Cir.· 1956-01-13 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the shipments remained in interstate commerce until unloaded and that the trial court did not err in denying the motions for mistrial and new trial.
• United States v. Reed
  647 F.2d 678· 6th Cir.· 1981-04-29 ·cited 40×
  The court held that counts 1 and 2 should have been merged as they constituted a single offense under 18 U.S.C. § 2315, and that while the admission of prior bad acts evidence was improper, it was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• G. W. B. v. State
  340 So. 2d 969· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-12-21 ·cited 40×
  Two juveniles appealed their adjudications for receiving stolen property, arguing the evidence was insufficient. The appellate court affirmed the adjudications, finding that the juveniles failed to properly preserve their arguments through adequate motions and assignments of erro
• Bergman v. United States
  253 F.2d 933· 6th Cir.· 1958-03-12 ·cited 40×
• Fisk v. State
  138 Fla. 815· Fla.· 1939-06-30 ·cited 39×
  H. L. Fisk was convicted of receiving stolen property based on a single transaction where he purchased gold from a self-confessed thief. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, finding insufficient evidence to support guilt despite suspicious circumstances.
• United States v. Estabrook
  774 F.2d 284· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the admission of other crimes evidence was proper under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to show knowledge and absence of mistake, and that discovery and new trial rulings were not erroneous.
• United States v. Wiley Rufus Ward
  552 F.2d 1080· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-13 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the prosecutor's comments during closing argument did not constitute an impermissible comment on the appellants' failure to testify.
• United States v. Derl Gray
  484 F.2d 352· 6th Cir.· 1973-08-07 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the seizure of the rifles was not justified under the plain view doctrine because it was not immediately apparent that they were incriminating evidence, and therefore the subsequent warrant was tainted.
• O'Neal v. State
  54 Fla. 96· Fla.· 1907-06-01 ·cited 38×
  This case addresses whether a jury verdict in a criminal trial can be considered valid and legally binding when it contains potentially vague or insufficient language. The court ultimately determined that a verdict could be upheld if its intent was clear and responsive to the cha
• Milanovich v. United States
  275 F.2d 716· 4th Cir.· 1960-03-08 ·cited 36×
  A defendant cannot be convicted and punished for both stealing property and receiving the same stolen property under statutes like 18 U.S.C.A. § 641, absent a clear congressional intent to the contrary.
• McDONOUGH v. United States
  248 F.2d 725· 8th Cir.· 1957-10-25 ·cited 36×
  The court held that a defendant who fails to renew a motion for judgment of acquittal after presenting defense testimony waives the right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal. The court also held that objections to jury instructions must be specific to be preser
• Channell v. State
  107 So. 2d 284· Fla. 2d DCA· 1958-10-01 ·cited 35×
  A judgment of conviction for receiving stolen property is materially defective if it omits the element that the accused knew the goods were stolen; verdicts containing reference to specific counts (e.g., 'as to Count II') are responsive to charges when construed in light of the i
• Jackson v. State
  736 So. 2d 77· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-06-09 ·cited 34×
  Gregory Jackson was convicted by jury of grand theft of a motor vehicle and possession of a motor vehicle with an altered VIN number after police stopped him driving a stolen Cadillac. The Fourth District reversed both convictions, holding that the state's evidence was insufficie
• United States v. Orrin Scott Reed
  658 F.2d 624· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-10 ·cited 34×
  The court held that denying travel expenses to appointed counsel for indigent defendants violates the Criminal Justice Act and the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Smith
  502 F.2d 1250· 5th Cir.· 1974-10-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that while there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions, an erroneous jury charge constituted plain error requiring reversal and remand for both appellants.
• Parsons v. United States
  188 F.2d 878· 5th Cir.· 1951-05-07 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict that the stolen car was still part of interstate commerce when received and concealed by the defendant.
• United States v. Wainer
  170 F.2d 603· 7th Cir.· 1948-11-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the appellant received or possessed stolen goods, or that he knew the goods were stolen.
• Worster v. State
  82 Fla. 463· Fla.· 1921-12-17 ·cited 34×
  John Worster, Jr. was convicted of receiving stolen property, but the Florida Supreme Court reversed because the State failed to prove that Worster knew the automobile tire was stolen at the time he received it—an essential element of the crime.
• United States v. Reese
  568 F.2d 1246· 6th Cir.· 1977-12-30 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the admission of rebuttal testimony regarding prior bad acts was proper to show intent and knowledge, and that the jury instructions, while containing a minor error, did not constitute plain error. The admission of hospital records was also proper. Finally, th
• Wilcox v. State
  248 So. 2d 692· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-06-07 ·cited 33×
  James Wilcox appeals his conviction for receiving stolen property after the state amended the information to charge a different crime, then withdrew the amended information and proceeded to trial on the original charge. The court reversed, holding that filing an amended informati
• Coleen Anita Ketelsen v. State
  211 So. 2d 853· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-07-02 ·cited 33×
  A person who commits larceny cannot be convicted of receiving or concealing the stolen property.
• United States v. Davidson
  367 F.2d 60· 6th Cir.· 1966-10-07 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the trial judge's instruction allowing the jury to recommend leniency, after the jury reported being deadlocked, was prejudicial error that affected the defendants' substantial rights.
• Carlton v. State
  108 Fla. 34· Fla.· 1933-01-13 ·cited 33×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a burglary conviction because the trial court gave an improper jury instruction regarding the presumption of guilt from possession of recently stolen property. The court also noted that the trial court erred in not requiring the prosecution to e
• Verlon Musgrove v. Eyman
  435 F.2d 1235· 9th Cir.· 1971-01-05 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the arrest and subsequent search were lawful, and the claim of ineffective counsel lacked merit.
• Johnson v. State
  226 So. 2d 884· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-10-03 ·cited 32×
  A defendant cannot be convicted of receiving stolen property as a lesser-included offense of larceny of an automobile, because these are separate, substantive, and legally inconsistent offenses, and receiving stolen property is not a necessary element in proving theft.
• United States v. Lewis
  338 F.2d 137· 6th Cir.· 1964-11-20 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in denying the motion for a new trial based on recanted testimony, nor did the judge's extensive questioning constitute reversible error, and the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.
• Yielding v. United States
  173 F.2d 46· 5th Cir.· 1949-03-08 ·cited 32×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions of Mildred Yielding and Truman Gaddis for receiving and transporting stolen automobiles in interstate commerce.
• Finley v. State
  153 Fla. 394· Fla.· 1943-07-13 ·cited 32×
  Joe Finley was convicted of receiving stolen property belonging to Saffold Brothers Produce Company and sentenced to the penitentiary. On appeal, he challenges the variance between the corporate name alleged in the information and the evidence presented, and contests the admissio
• Lasher v. State
  80 Fla. 712· Fla.· 1920-11-22 ·cited 32×
  This case addresses whether an information charging larceny of a "Ford touring car" is sufficient and whether a single concluding phrase for the entire indictment applies to all counts. The court affirmed the conviction, finding the description adequate and the concluding phrase
• Adams v. State
  60 Fla. 1· Fla.· 1910-06-01 ·cited 32×
  The court considered whether the evidence supported a conviction for receiving stolen property when the defendant may have participated in the larceny itself. The court held that the evidence did not sufficiently prove the larceny was completed before the defendant's involvement,
• Bradley v. State
  20 Fla. 738· Fla.· 1884-01-01 ·cited 32×
  This case addresses whether an indictment charging a defendant with buying, receiving, and aiding in the concealment of stolen goods in a single count is legally sufficient. The court held that such an indictment is valid because the statute defines these actions as part of a sin
• Haefeli v. Chernoff
  526 F.2d 1314· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-15 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the automobile was permissible under the automobile exception due to exigent circumstances and probable cause, and that the subsequent search warrant for the apartment was validly issued based on sufficient probable cause.
• United States v. Nelson
  459 F.2d 884· 6th Cir.· 1972-04-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a search warrant affidavit containing both illegally obtained and legally obtained information must be quashed if the illegally obtained information is essential to establishing probable cause.
• United States v. Hamilton
  457 F.2d 95· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-13 ·cited 30×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's guilty verdict and that the trial judge did not err in denying the motion for a new trial or the continuance.
• United States v. Curiale
  414 F.2d 744· 2d Cir.· 1969-08-04 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendant's consent to search was voluntary and not coerced, despite his belief that agents would obtain a warrant, and that Miranda warnings were not required prior to his non-custodial questioning.
• Teel v. United States
  407 F.2d 604· 8th Cir.· 1969-02-28 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the appellant knowingly received stolen government property and that the jury instruction regarding possession of recently stolen property was warranted.
• Glass v. United States
  351 F.2d 678· 10th Cir.· 1965-10-13 ·cited 30×
  A defendant cannot be convicted of both bank robbery (as an aider and abettor) and receiving the stolen property from that same robbery, as the latter is a lesser included offense.
• Stephenson v. State
  89 Fla. 351· Fla.· 1925-04-03 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction of two merchants for receiving stolen cigarettes, finding the evidence insufficient to prove the defendants knew the property was stolen or had reason to suspect it was. The case establishes that knowledge of theft or suspicious c
• Bailey v. State
  76 Fla. 103· Fla.· 1918-07-09 ·cited 30×
  H. Clay Bailey was convicted of feloniously buying and receiving stolen sugar knowing it to have been stolen. On appeal, Bailey challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and the trial court's refusal to give certain jury instructions. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convi
• United States v. Patterson
  678 F.2d 774· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the grand jury testimony was admissible as past recorded recollection and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for receiving stolen property, but reversed the conspiracy conviction due to the acquittal of all named co-conspirators and insuffi
• Lebowitz v. State
  313 So. 2d 473· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-05-27 ·cited 28×
  Walter Lebowitz, an attorney, was convicted of receiving stolen property—a purse worth approximately $200 that his client George Foley allegedly stole from Neiman-Marcus. Lebowitz appealed on multiple grounds, including claims that cross-examination violated his Fifth Amendment r
• United States v. Williams
  473 F.2d 507· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-09 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court committed prejudicial error by giving jury instructions that, combined with prefatory remarks, effectively directed a verdict of guilty and unduly restricted the jury's consideration of the evidence.
• United States v. Harris
  409 F.2d 77· 4th Cir.· 1969-04-08 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying pretrial discovery motions, motions to sequester witnesses, motions for severance, or motions for acquittal, and that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions.
• United States v. Tippett
  353 F.2d 335· 4th Cir.· 1965-11-22 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the value of stolen goods for purposes of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2315 should be determined by their market value at the time and place of the theft.
• Page v. State
  376 So. 2d 901· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-11-07 ·cited 27×
  Wade Ray Page appealed three judgments and sentences imposed after probation revocation, challenging the circuit court's jurisdiction over a receiving stolen property charge, the assessment of court costs, and hard labor provisions. The court reversed the stolen property convicti