Receiving Stolen Property

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

• Whitefield v. State
  137 Fla. 552· Fla.· 1939-04-18 ·cited 11×
  The appellate court affirmed a conviction for receiving stolen property. The court addressed issues of former jeopardy, the right to present witnesses, and the sufficiency of the evidence and jury instructions, finding no reversible error.
• The United States v. Geno Chiarelli
  898 F.2d 373· 3d Cir.· 1990-03-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the danger to public safety created by the defendants' attempted escape was a valid ground for upward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines, the magnitude of the theft itself was not. The court vacated the sentences and remanded for resentencing.
• Colvin v. State
  445 So. 2d 657· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-02-21 ·cited 10×
  Gerald Colvin was convicted of five counts of grand theft for purchasing stolen firearms on different occasions from the same seller. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed his convictions, holding that multiple counts of theft are permissible under Florida's theft statute e
• United States v. Borum
  584 F.2d 424· D.C. Cir.· 1978-06-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the defense of entrapment, as there was sufficient evidence of government inducement and lack of predisposition.
• Arthur v. State
  351 So. 2d 60· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-10-11 ·cited 10×
  Donald Arthur pleaded nolo contendere to robbery while carrying a firearm, a life felony requiring a minimum three-year prison sentence. The court reversed the mandatory minimum imprisonment requirement because Arthur did not personally possess the firearm, even though he partici
• Anderson v. State
  338 So. 2d 209· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-05-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the judgment of conviction was improper because the jury's verdict failed to allege knowledge that the goods were stolen, an essential element of the crime.
• Emmitt v. McWHIRTER
  325 So. 2d 463· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-01-26 ·cited 10×
  McWhirter was charged with receiving or aiding in the concealment of stolen credit cards found in his car. The court affirmed his conviction, holding that the jury could lawfully convict him under a theory that he was present aiding and abetting the actual theft by his friend Rus
• State v. Gungor Mehmet Yatman
  320 So. 2d 401· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-05-09 ·cited 10×
  A prosecutor's ex parte deposition of a represented criminal defendant without notice to defense counsel violates Disciplinary Rule 7-104 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, but such ethical violation does not automatically require dismissal of charges; instead, the trial
• United States ex rel. Joseph A. DiRIENZO v. Yeager
  443 F.2d 228· 3d Cir.· 1971-06-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the police conduct did not violate the Fourth Amendment, and any error in admitting evidence from a warrantless search was harmless.
• United States v. Gale Hearold Johnson
  442 F.2d 318· 8th Cir.· 1971-05-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the traveler's checks were admissible, the jury instructions regarding possession of stolen property were proper, and the value of the stolen money orders was sufficiently established.
• United States v. Serge Christian Hysohion and Eduardo Rimbaud
  439 F.2d 274· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge's comments on the evidence, while ill-advised, did not constitute reversible error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt and the jury's instructions. The prosecutor's summation also did not exceed permissible bounds.
• Taylor v. State
  241 So. 2d 426· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-12-01 ·cited 10×
  John Lee Taylor was convicted of receiving stolen property after being acquitted of forging and uttering forged checks. The court reversed his conviction, holding that the state failed to prove the essential element of knowledge that the checks were stolen, and his acquittal of t
• Robertson v. United States
  263 F.2d 872· 5th Cir.· 1959-02-26 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the trial court's procedural rulings.
• Stephenson v. United States
  211 F.2d 702· 9th Cir.· 1954-03-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the failure to instruct the jury to view an accomplice's testimony with distrust was plain error requiring reversal.
• United States v. Williams
  194 F.2d 72· 7th Cir.· 1952-01-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the finding that the defendants knowingly possessed and received stolen property, and that evidence of other thefts was properly admitted.
• McQUAID v. United States
  193 F.2d 696· D.C. Cir.· 1951-11-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an omission in jury instructions regarding the value of stolen property was not prejudicial because the sentence imposed was consistent with the lesser offense, rendering the exact value determination by the jury immaterial.
• United States v. Dunbar
  149 F.2d 151· 7th Cir.· 1945-05-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that consecutive sentences for separate offenses under 18 U.S.C.A. § 409 are permissible, even if part of a single transaction.
• Flynn v. State
  86 Fla. 467· Fla.· 1923-11-14 ·cited 10×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for larceny, holding that an accessory cannot be convicted if the principal has not been convicted, especially when indicted at common law.
• Hatcher v. State
  74 Fla. 112· Fla.· 1917-10-19 ·cited 10×
  Hatcher was convicted of receiving stolen goods knowing them to have been stolen. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence showed larceny by the servant rather than embezzlement, and therefore the conviction was proper under the statute.
• United States v. Kaye
  D.D.C.· 1970-06-30 ·cited 9×
• McCLENDON v. State
  117 So. 2d 506· Fla. 1st DCA· 1960-01-19 ·cited 9×
  The State need not prove that a named property owner was duly and legally incorporated as an essential element of a receiving stolen property conviction; the corporate status serves only as a description or identification of the owner, and ownership may be sufficiently establishe
• Stovall v. State
  156 Fla. 832· Fla.· 1946-01-25 ·cited 9×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Stovall's conviction on four counts of receiving stolen property, rejecting his challenge that the information was duplicitous for charging multiple similar offenses on different occasions. The court held that multiple counts charging similar cr
• United States v. Pemberton
  904 F.2d 515· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in valuing the stolen drawings based on the contract price, rather than their worth to the defendant or their incomplete state.
• United States v. Muzii
  676 F.2d 919· 2d Cir.· 1982-04-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the brief custody of stolen goods by undercover detectives, used for surveillance, did not constitute recovery of the goods for the rightful owner, and thus the goods retained their stolen character.
• United States v. Scott
  665 F.2d 874· 9th Cir.· 1981-11-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the police officer's actions in securing a legally parked vehicle and removing a visible treasury check for safekeeping did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Poteet
  573 F.2d 351· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the use of a prior conviction for impeachment was permissible and that the trial judge did not abuse her discretion in denying a continuance or in admitting a witness's prejudicial testimony.
• State v. Erwin Perkins
  349 So. 2d 802· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-09-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum and compliance therewith does not automatically grant immunity; the witness must assert their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• United States v. Stanford Katz
  535 F.2d 593· 10th Cir.· 1976-04-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding the indictment, the applicability of statutory exclusion clauses, the admissibility of co-conspirator statements, or jury instructions on prior inconsistent statements.
• United States v. Taylor
  482 F.2d 1376· 4th Cir.· 1973-08-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the government's evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's guilty verdict.
• Avilia v. State
  278 So. 2d 298· Fla. 4th DCA· 1973-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that although the defendant was convicted on multiple counts, the actions constituted a single offense of receiving stolen property, requiring only one adjudication and sentence.
• United States v. Cheers
  439 F.2d 1097· 5th Cir.· 1971-02-08 ·cited 8×
• Schuster v. State
  235 So. 2d 30· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-05-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to establish the defendant's knowledge that the credit card was stolen, and that the arrest was lawful.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Jack Lurie & Terry Lurie v. Honorable Cecil R. Rosier
  226 So. 2d 825· Fla. 4th DCA· 1969-09-19 ·cited 8×
  Witnesses questioned under subpoena in an investigation of larceny are entitled to statutory immunity from prosecution for any transaction or matter disclosed in their testimony when that testimony constitutes a link in the chain of evidence connecting them to the enumerated crim
• Evans v. State
  218 So. 2d 515· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-02-11 ·cited 8×
  The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient competent evidence to support the trial court's judgment.
• Shuler v. State
  213 So. 2d 312· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-08-13 ·cited 8×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a defendant's convictions for larceny of an automobile and receiving stolen property, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict.
• Babb v. United States
  210 F.2d 473· 5th Cir.· 1954-02-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and that evidence obtained from seizures, even for a different crime, was admissible if relevant. The court also found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for dismissal, bill of particulars, or con
• United States v. Richardson
  817 F.2d 886· D.C. Cir.· 1987-05-01 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the District Court's failure to repeat the jury admonition not to discuss the case was not reversible error, as the initial admonition was given, the trial was short, and no improper contact was alleged.
• Hutton v. State
  332 So. 2d 686· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-05-28 ·cited 7×
  William Hutton was convicted of receiving stolen property after police recovered $400 worth of tools that he had possessed and given to another person as payment on a debt. The appellate court affirmed his conviction, holding that the state established prima facie evidence of the
• Seymour v. State
  246 So. 2d 155· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-03-30 ·cited 7×
  Affirmed conviction for receiving stolen property where trial court properly found sufficient evidence of the defendant's knowledge that property was stolen.
• Belk v. State
  167 So. 2d 239· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-07-10 ·cited 7×
  Delores Belk was convicted by jury of receiving stolen goods in connection with two breaking and entering incidents at apparel stores in Lakeland, Florida. She appealed on grounds of insufficient circumstantial evidence, exclusion of a hearsay letter, and prejudicial mention of a
• Helton v. Fauver
  930 F.2d 1040· 3d Cir.· 1991-04-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the New Jersey Supreme Court's interpretation of the state's juvenile law was not unforeseeable, and therefore its retroactive application to Helton did not violate due process.
• United States v. Wentz
  800 F.2d 1325· 4th Cir.· 1986-09-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury instruction on replacement value was not reversible error, the second trial did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, and the government's alleged negligence in preserving the boat did not warrant reversal.
• Bullard v. State
  358 So. 2d 48· Fla. 4th DCA· 1978-04-10 ·cited 6×
  Edgar Bullard appealed his conviction for receiving stolen property, challenging the admissibility of his confession on grounds that it was coerced by police promises not to prosecute. The court reversed because the trial judge failed to make a specific finding of voluntariness o
• State v. Erroll Brooks
  348 So. 2d 417· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-07-29 ·cited 6×
  No. Justice William H. Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the 5-3 majority. The Court held that the decision of the storage facility to sell the goods could not be considered a state action, and therefore did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. To show that they had a claim wor
• Richardson v. State
  345 So. 2d 380· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-04-26 ·cited 6×
  Kenneth Richardson appealed his conviction for buying, receiving, or concealing stolen property under Florida law. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, rejecting Richardson's arguments that the jury instruction on knowledge was improper, that the evidence w
• O'Sullivan v. State
  335 So. 2d 869· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-08-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for buying, receiving, or concealing stolen property.
• United States v. Knight
  505 F.2d 112· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and no reversible error in the trial proceedings.
• Eagle v. State
  270 So. 2d 468· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-12-20 ·cited 6×
  A judgment for receiving stolen property is defective if it fails to recite that the property was received with knowledge of its stolen character.
• United States v. Koran
  453 F.2d 144· 10th Cir.· 1972-01-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the offense of possessing stolen goods does not require proof of guilty knowledge at the exact moment of receipt; subsequent knowledge while still in possession is sufficient.
• United States v. Suel
  435 F.2d 1272· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it was plain error to instruct the jury that defendants could be found guilty of both larceny and receiving the proceeds of that larceny.