Receiving Stolen Property

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

• Heineman v. State
  327 So. 2d 898· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-02-17 ·cited 27×
  Appellants Heineman and Lehman appealed their convictions for buying, receiving, or concealing stolen property and possessing marijuana, arguing the trial court erred by finding them guilty without sufficient evidence of their knowledge of the crimes' essential elements. The cour
• United States v. Underwood
  588 F.2d 1073· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-02 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad act evidence, even without a cautionary instruction, constituted harmless error, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or sentencing.
• Waters v. State
  354 So. 2d 1277· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-02-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the information failed to allege the value of the stolen property, rendering the conviction and subsequent probation orders void.
• United States v. Kidding
  560 F.2d 1303· 7th Cir.· 1977-07-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the tractor and trailer constituted separate offenses under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2313 and 2315, and that the evidence sufficiently supported the convictions despite claims of duplicative charges, insufficient interstate commerce proof, ineffective assistance of counse
• Overton v. United States
  405 F.2d 168· 5th Cir.· 1968-12-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove guilty knowledge and that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion.
• COX v. United States
  284 F.2d 704· 8th Cir.· 1960-12-02 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing the government to refresh a witness's recollection using prior grand jury testimony, nor in its handling of the record correction or admission of circumstantial evidence.
• Shibley v. United States
  237 F.2d 327· 9th Cir.· 1956-03-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the jury's verdict and that the trial was fair and impartial, affirming the conviction.
• Metcalf v. State
  98 Fla. 457· Fla.· 1929-09-23 ·cited 26×
  Clarence Metcalf was convicted of receiving stolen property under Florida law. The Supreme Court affirmed his conviction despite his acquittal on a breaking-and-entering charge, holding that a confederate of a thief can be guilty of both receiving and concealing stolen property e
• United States v. Smith
  403 F.2d 74· 6th Cir.· 1968-11-20 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the trial judge's admonition to the jury to disregard a witness's statement about the defendant's prior penitentiary confinement was insufficient to cure the prejudice, resulting in an unfair trial.
• Hudson v. State
  408 So. 2d 224· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-05-06 ·cited 24×
  Charles Philip Hudson appealed two criminal convictions arising from his alleged theft of gemstones and subsequent dealing in stolen property. The Fourth District affirmed his conviction for dealing in stolen property but reversed his grand theft conviction due to the trial court
• United States v. Lambert
  463 F.2d 552· 7th Cir.· 1972-06-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the jury's finding of guilty knowledge, that inconsistent verdicts on separate counts are permissible, and that evidence of other similar purchases was admissible.
• United States ex rel. Henry D. Harris v. Hendricks
  423 F.2d 1096· 3d Cir.· 1970-03-13 ·cited 24×
  A consent to a warrantless search is not rendered a nullity simply because the consenting party was unaware of their Fourth Amendment rights or was not explicitly advised of them.
• United States v. Braico
  422 F.2d 543· 7th Cir.· 1970-01-14 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while the conspiracy conviction must be reversed due to insufficient proof, the convictions on the substantive counts are affirmed because the evidence was overwhelming and the joinder of defendants was not prejudicial.
• United States v. Simon
  225 F.2d 260· 3d Cir.· 1955-07-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the government was estopped from relitigating facts determined by a prior acquittal, and admitting evidence contrary to that acquittal in a second trial constitutes reversible error.
• United States v. Marpes (two cases)
  198 F.2d 186· 3d Cir.· 1952-07-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and sentences for receiving stolen goods and for stealing from an interstate shipment, and that the jury's credibility determinations were binding.
• United States v. Dolasco
  184 F.2d 746· 3d Cir.· 1950-10-19 ·cited 24×
  A conviction for stealing goods in interstate commerce can stand even if the defendant is acquitted of receiving the goods, and jury verdicts need not be consistent.
• Spurgeon King v. State
  156 Fla. 817· Fla.· 1946-01-22 ·cited 24×
  Spurgeon King was convicted of receiving and concealing stolen whisky. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence sufficiently established King's knowledge that the whisky was stolen based on the suspicious circumstances of the transaction and hi
• Brant Hayward and Vance Hayward v. State
  152 Fla. 608· Fla.· 1943-03-23 ·cited 24×
  Brant and Vance Hayward were convicted of knowingly receiving and concealing stolen automobile wheels and tires worth $100. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed their convictions, rejecting challenges to the validity of search warrants, the sufficiency of evidence of guilty knowled
• Lawson v. State
  125 Fla. 335· Fla.· 1936-09-22 ·cited 24×
  D. B. Lawson was convicted of receiving stolen automobile tires knowing them to have been stolen. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and awarded a new trial, holding that the trial court's jury instruction improperly shifted the burden of proof by requiring the defendant to prove
• Bernie Ludwig v. State
  215 So. 2d 898· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-11-26 ·cited 23×
  A valid search warrant may be issued even if the affidavit does not allege the informant's reliability, and officers may seize property not described in the warrant if they have probable cause to believe it is stolen.
• Brazier v. State
  95 Fla. 896· Fla.· 1928-05-10 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for receiving stolen property, finding insufficient evidence that the defendant possessed or concealed the stolen items.
• United States v. James Marshall Shackleford (84-5995)
  777 F.2d 1141· 6th Cir.· 1985-11-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury instructions on intent for embezzlement were proper, the denial of an evidentiary hearing on juror misconduct was not an abuse of discretion, and restitution was lawfully imposed under the Federal Probation Act.
• United States v. Cortellesso
  663 F.2d 361· 1st Cir.· 1981-11-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the removal of defense counsel due to a conflict of interest did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice, and that tape recordings were properly admitted into evidence.
• State v. Luck
  336 So. 2d 464· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-08-06 ·cited 22×
  The State appealed a trial court order discharging defendants from charges of receiving stolen property under the speedy trial rule. The appellate court reversed, holding that the original information charged a felony (not a misdemeanor), that the 180-day speedy trial deadline ha
• McQUEEN v. State
  304 So. 2d 501· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-10-31 ·cited 22×
  A criminal conviction cannot be based solely on an extra-judicial confession unless there is independent prima facie evidence of the corpus delicti, which for receiving stolen property includes proof of guilty knowledge.
• United States v. Olsen
  487 F.2d 77· 8th Cir.· 1973-11-06 ·cited 22×
  The admission of a prior conviction for a similar offense to show knowledge, and the admission of testimony about a pistol unrelated to the crime charged, were not reversible error.
• United States v. Cimini
  427 F.2d 129· 6th Cir.· 1970-06-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that publicity during the trial did not prejudice the defendants and that O'Malley could be held responsible for conspiracy acts committed before he joined.
• Ashby v. State
  228 So. 2d 400· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-11-07 ·cited 22×
  Two defendants appealed their convictions for grand larceny after pleading nolo contendere, challenging the trial court's denial of their motion to suppress evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure. The court reversed and remanded, holding that the warrantless sear
• Pearson v. United States
  378 F.2d 555· 5th Cir.· 1967-05-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish that the stolen Ruby was moving in interstate commerce and that the defendant was not entrapped.
• Warren v. State
  174 So. 2d 429· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-04-20 ·cited 22×
  Warren appealed a probation order (without adjudication of guilt) following his jury conviction for receiving stolen property. The appellate court first resolved a jurisdictional question regarding whether it had authority to review an interlocutory probation order, concluding th
• Janow v. United States
  141 F.2d 1017· 5th Cir.· 1944-04-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury could infer guilty knowledge from the possession of recently stolen goods, and that the trial court's instructions were proper.
• Nelson v. State
  372 So. 2d 949· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-05-18 ·cited 21×
  Nelson was charged with receiving stolen property and moved to dismiss, arguing the state could not establish corpus delicti based on stipulated facts. The Florida appellate court affirmed the denial of the motion to dismiss, holding that extrajudicial admissions made by Nelson t
• Collins v. State
  13 Fla. 651· Fla.· 1869-01-01 ·cited 21×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for receiving stolen goods, holding that a judge's instruction to the jury that certain disputed facts had been "fully established" violated a statute requiring judicial charges to address only legal questions. The court also addres
• Jeri Lee Haugland and Nils Richard Haugland v. State
  374 So. 2d 1026· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-07-31 ·cited 20×
  Jeri Lee and Nils Richard Haugland were convicted of burglary, attempted burglary, receiving stolen property, and unlawful possession of burglary tools. The Florida Court of Appeal reversed their convictions for unlawful possession of burglary tools because the police conducted a
• Embree v. United States
  320 F.2d 666· 9th Cir.· 1963-06-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence presented was wholly insufficient to support a finding that the defendant knowingly received or possessed stolen goods or conspired to sell them.
• Murphy v. United States
  133 F.2d 622· 6th Cir.· 1943-02-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts finding the appellants guilty of possessing and receiving stolen cigarettes from an interstate shipment, and that various alleged trial errors were either harmless or not preserved.
• Pelaez v. State
  107 Fla. 50· Fla.· 1932-10-18 ·cited 20×
  Charles Pelaez was convicted of receiving stolen property (15 sacks of sugar) with knowledge that it was stolen. The Florida Supreme Court reversed because the information alleged the property belonged to O'Berry & Hall Company, but evidence showed it actually belonged to Caldwel
• Alvarez v. State
  75 Fla. 286· Fla.· 1918-02-09 ·cited 20×
  Carlos Alvarez was convicted of receiving stolen property knowing it to have been stolen. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction due to erroneous admission of hearsay evidence and other evidentiary errors, while addressing substantive issues regarding the sufficiency o
• Criss v. The City OF Kent
  867 F.2d 259· 6th Cir.· 1988-12-28 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment, as probable cause existed for the arrest and no duty to investigate further was constitutionally required.
• Lovic Adams v. State
  138 Fla. 206· Fla.· 1939-05-23 ·cited 19×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for receiving stolen property. The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to require the state to elect between counts charging larceny and receiving stolen property, nor in denying a motion for a directed verdict,
• United States v. Plum
  558 F.2d 568· 10th Cir.· 1977-07-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of certain exhibits was either harmless error or proper under the business records exception, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or in denying the motion for a new trial.
• In the Interest of B. S. v. State
  320 So. 2d 459· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-09-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that circumstantial evidence was insufficient to support adjudications of delinquency for breaking and entering and grand larceny, but sufficient for buying, receiving, or aiding in the concealment of stolen property.
• Lampley v. State
  214 So. 2d 515· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-09-24 ·cited 18×
  Samuel Lampley was convicted of uttering a forged check and receiving stolen property after presenting a forged check at a supermarket. The court reversed his convictions, finding that the state failed to prove essential elements of both offenses—specifically, that Lampley knew t
• United States v. Fusco
  398 F.2d 32· 7th Cir.· 1968-07-02 ·cited 18×
  The conviction for theft under 18 U.S.C. § 659 cannot stand because the theft occurred at the Hyde Park station, not Fusco's station, and Fusco was not indicted as a receiver of stolen goods.
• United States v. Rosengarten
  357 F.2d 263· 2d Cir.· 1966-02-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for receiving stolen jewelry, and the acquittal of a co-defendant was not fatally inconsistent.
• Tidwell v. THE Cir. Court OF Desoto Cnty.
  151 Fla. 333· Fla.· 1942-09-15 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of prohibition challenging circuit court jurisdiction over a felony charge for receiving stolen property. The petitioner argued that making restitution of the stolen property before trial reduced the offense to a misdemeanor, t
• Johnson v. State
  127 Fla. 100· Fla.· 1937-02-13 ·cited 18×
  T. Johnston was convicted of receiving stolen fruit knowing it had been stolen. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, rejecting challenges to the sufficiency of evidence, the trial court's evidentiary ruling, and the alibi defense.
• Myers v. State
  115 Fla. 627· Fla.· 1934-06-25 ·cited 18×
  The court reversed a conviction because the jury's verdict was not specific enough to support a judgment. The verdict found defendants guilty of 'Concealing stolen goods' but failed to include the essential element of knowing the goods were stolen, which is required by statute.
• Bargesser v. State
  95 Fla. 404· Fla.· 1928-03-01 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a defendant cannot be convicted of both larceny and receiving the same stolen property, as these offenses are legally inconsistent when committed by the same person. The court reversed the conviction because the jury's verdict found the defenda
• Monroe B. Harris v. United States
  261 F.2d 897· 9th Cir.· 1958-12-01 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court did not err in admitting testimony or in its jury instructions.