Receiving Stolen Property

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

• Mayer v. State
  231 So. 2d 540· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-02-20 ·cited 6×
  John Michael Mayer was convicted of receiving stolen property (a pistol) but appealed, challenging the legal sufficiency of evidence. The court reversed, finding the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mayer knew or should have known the pistol was stolen when he
• Schectman v. State
  220 So. 2d 657· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-03-25 ·cited 6×
  Henry Schectman was convicted of unlawfully receiving stolen property, but the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed because the state failed to prove that Schectman knew the clothing he possessed was stolen. The court held that purchasing merchandise at a flea market, standi
• Rubie Charles Jenkins v. United States
  392 F.2d 303· 10th Cir.· 1968-04-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that venue was improperly laid in Kansas and was not waived by the appellant, as the evidence did not sufficiently connect the appellant to Kansas for the charge of receiving stolen property.
• O'Brien v. State
  206 So. 2d 217· Fla. 2d DCA· 1968-01-17 ·cited 6×
  Patrick O'Brien was convicted by jury verdict of buying stolen property under Florida Statute § 811.16. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction due to two errors: the trial court abused its discretion in denying a new trial based on recanted testimony from th
• Jewell James Williams v. United States
  358 F.2d 325· 9th Cir.· 1966-03-29 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the trial court's proceedings or rulings.
• United States v. Rugendorf
  316 F.2d 589· 7th Cir.· 1963-04-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, the trial court did not err in refusing to suppress evidence obtained via a search warrant based on hearsay, and did not err in refusing to disclose the informant's identity.
• Browder v. United States
  292 F.2d 44· 5th Cir.· 1961-06-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction, and the trial court did not err in its conduct.
• Gray v. State
  104 So. 2d 92· Fla. 2d DCA· 1958-06-27 ·cited 6×
  Jerry Gray was convicted of receiving and concealing stolen property. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed because the State failed to prove the alleged owner's identity as required—it proved a company name but not that G. G. Sirman actually owned the property, as charge
• United States v. Slaughter
  255 F.2d 770· 7th Cir.· 1958-05-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for receiving stolen property, as knowledge of the theft could be inferred from the circumstances.
• United States v. Hefler
  159 F.2d 831· 2d Cir.· 1947-02-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove knowledge of theft and interstate commerce, and that evidentiary rulings and the denial of a new trial motion were not erroneous.
• Bryan v. State
  148 Fla. 61· Fla.· 1941-08-01 ·cited 6×
  Theodore Bryan was convicted of receiving and concealing a stolen automobile motor and sentenced to two years in prison. On appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and various trial court rulings, but the Florida Supreme Court found no error and affirmed his convict
• Gordon v. State
  97 Fla. 806· Fla.· 1929-05-13 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction where defendants were found guilty on general verdict for both larceny and receiving stolen property, finding the verdict legally inconsistent.
• Wells v. State
  75 Fla. 229· Fla.· 1918-02-05 ·cited 6×
  John Wells was convicted of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. On appeal, Wells challenged the trial court's denial of a directed verdict, admission of certain testimony, sufficiency of evidence, and prosecuting attorney misconduct. The Florida Supreme Court affirm
• State v. Weir
  488 So. 2d 557· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-04-17 ·cited 5×
  Florida charged Weir with forgery under § 831.01 for allegedly forging a credit card invoice. The trial court dismissed the charge, reasoning that the credit card statute (§ 817.481) had superseded the forgery statute. The appellate court reversed, holding that multiple statutes
• Metzler v. State
  229 So. 2d 886· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-12-09 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for receiving stolen property was proper, as his voluntary production of the coin and subsequent statements were admissible evidence.
• Will Walker v. State
  114 Fla. 500· Fla.· 1934-04-06 ·cited 5×
  Will Walker was convicted of receiving stolen postal savings certificates knowing them to have been stolen. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that certificates stolen while valuable remain stolen property even if subsequently cancelled by the federal government, and kno
• Davis v. State
  87 Fla. 505· Fla.· 1924-05-21 ·cited 5×
  Harold Davis was convicted of receiving stolen property (a Ford automobile) knowing it to be stolen. On appeal, Davis challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the guilty
• United States v. Burton A. Grossman and Barry S. Badolato
  614 F.2d 295· 1st Cir.· 1980-02-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a catalog was admissible as a business record or commercial publication and that a jury instruction regarding possession of recently stolen property was proper.
• Barket v. State
  356 So. 2d 263· Fla.· 1978-02-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction, when considered with other instructions, was not reversible error.
• United States v. Davis
  568 F.2d 514· 6th Cir.· 1978-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the government failed to prove by competent evidence that the vehicles in the defendant's possession were stolen and had moved in interstate commerce.
• Grover Cleveland Tadlock v. State
  343 So. 2d 961· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-03-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's judgment must conform to the jury's verdict, and a judgment that does not include the jury's finding of prior knowledge is incorrect.
• Johnson v. State
  333 So. 2d 505· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-06-17 ·cited 4×
  Jack Nelson Johnson was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny, grand larceny, and receiving stolen property. The trial court denied his motions to require the state to elect between the inconsistent counts of grand larceny and receiving stolen pro
• United States v. Godwin
  522 F.2d 1135· 4th Cir.· 1975-03-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a dismissed indictment does not constitute a binding judicial admission, and the admission of evidence to identify the stolen tractor was proper.
• United States v. Pauldino
  487 F.2d 127· 10th Cir.· 1973-11-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of receiving stolen property, and that his other contentions regarding attorney-client privilege, admissibility of his statement, and prosecutorial misconduct were without merit.
• United States v. Crawford
  466 F.2d 1155· 10th Cir.· 1972-09-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecution of the defendant for a Dyer Act violation was inherently unfair due to a flawed plea bargaining process and lack of communication between federal and state authorities, despite the jury's verdict.
• Raffone v. Adams
  468 F.2d 860· 2d Cir.· 1972-09-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a series of three tips, viewed in conjunction and corroborated by police observations, provided the requisite probable cause for the warrantless arrest of the petitioner and the subsequent warrantless search of his truck.
• United States v. Kelley
  462 F.2d 372· 4th Cir.· 1972-07-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to convict defendant Kelley of receiving and concealing stolen property, but sufficient evidence to convict defendant Woody.
• McMICHAEL v. State
  258 So. 2d 26· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-02-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendant's convictions for receiving stolen property and possession of burglarious tools.
• Kendrick v. Nelson
  448 F.2d 25· 9th Cir.· 1971-08-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the search of the appellant's automobile was lawful under the Fourth Amendment, and his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was without merit.
• State v. Biesendorfer
  244 So. 2d 147· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-02-17 ·cited 4×
  The State appeals the trial court's order vacating Biesendorfer's conviction for receiving stolen property on remand from a prior appeal. The appellate court reverses, holding that issues decided on direct appeal are res judicata and cannot be reconsidered through post-conviction
• Cobb v. Brautigam
  239 So. 2d 125· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-09-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the finding that the petitioner had knowledge the automobile was stolen, and thus the dismissal was not justified.
• Flowers v. State
  222 So. 2d 786· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-05-16 ·cited 4×
  Richard Flowers was convicted of receiving and concealing stolen watches. On appeal, he challenged the admission of evidence regarding a prior similar crime (stolen televisions), the trial judge's comments on evidence, the failure to require the jury to determine property value,
• United States v. Weisman
  366 F.2d 767· 2d Cir.· 1966-10-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to uphold the conviction and that the prosecutor's actions and the admission of evidence were not grounds for reversal.
• Ortiz v. United States
  351 F.2d 933· 10th Cir.· 1965-10-22 ·cited 4×
  A defendant charged solely with receiving stolen property cannot invoke the rule prohibiting conviction for both stealing and receiving the same property if the evidence elicited by the defense suggests their involvement in the theft.
• Trimble v. State
  143 So. 2d 331· Fla. 1st DCA· 1962-07-12 ·cited 4×
  When an accomplice's confession is brought to a defendant's attention and the defendant expressly assents to specific portions as true, those portions become admissible as the defendant's own adopted statement, not as hearsay evidence of the accomplice's confession. The admissibi
• McKINNES v. State
  115 So. 2d 184· Fla. 1st DCA· 1959-10-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the sentence imposed was invalid because the conditions for alternative sentencing under Fla. Stat. § 811.17 were not met, requiring resentencing under Fla. Stat. § 811.16.
• Varrell v. State
  98 So. 2d 895· Fla. 3d DCA· 1957-12-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence and that any error regarding the information was rendered harmless.
• Inman v. United States
  243 F.2d 256· D.C. Cir.· 1957-03-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that unexplained possession of recently stolen goods, coupled with admissions, is legally sufficient to support a conviction for receiving stolen goods.
• Cosenza v. United States
  195 F.2d 177· 9th Cir.· 1952-03-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence supported the conviction for receiving stolen goods in interstate commerce and that any insufficiency in the misprision of felony count was harmless due to concurrent sentencing.
• Thacker v. United States
  155 F.2d 901· 5th Cir.· 1946-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of bank records and coupons was not reversible error, and the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Powell
  155 F.2d 184· 7th Cir.· 1946-05-09 ·cited 4×
• Hinson v. State
  62 Fla. 63· Fla.· 1911-06-01 ·cited 4×
  Hinson was convicted of grand larceny for stealing a valuable bracelet worth approximately $4,400 from the Southern Express Company. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, finding that despite some evidentiary issues, the overwhelming evidence of his guilt was conclus
• Barket v. State
  342 So. 2d 526· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-02-03 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Standard Jury Instruction on receiving stolen property correctly states the law by requiring the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that circumstances were so suspicious as to put a person of ordinary intelligence on inquiry, rather than requiring proof that the
• Carlos v. State
  155 Fla. 740· Fla.· 1945-03-13 ·cited 3×
• Ned Long v. State
  150 Fla. 715· Fla.· 1942-06-12 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for receiving and concealing stolen goods, holding that the evidence sufficiently proved the defendant's guilt. The court found that the defendant received goods knowing they were stolen, even though the initial taking was by an emp
• Hayward Fisher v. State
  146 Fla. 474· Fla.· 1941-03-25 ·cited 3×
  Hayward Fisher was convicted of receiving stolen property worth $55 and sentenced to eight months in jail. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction and sentence, finding insufficient evidence to establish knowledge that the property was stolen and noting the state's conc
• State v. McLeod
  135 Fla. 109· Fla.· 1938-11-23 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence of two men convicted of receiving and concealing stolen property who made restitution. The court held that Section 5139 R.G.S. (allowing alternative sentencing upon restitution) must be read together with Section 5138
• State v. Mayo
  111 Fla. 579· Fla.· 1933-07-28 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the validity of an information and judgment convicting Johnnie Taylor of robbery, rejecting his habeas corpus challenge that the information was defective and that no valid judgment of conviction existed. The court affirmed that both the informati
• Walsh v. State
  606 So. 2d 636· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-09-04 ·cited 2×
  George Walsh appeals his re-sentencing for drug trafficking convictions, challenging the calculation of his sentencing guideline scoresheet. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal finds multiple scoring errors in Walsh's prior record and vacates the sentence for resentencing
• United States v. Santiago
  729 F.2d 38· 1st Cir.· 1984-03-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for receiving stolen United States Treasury checks and that the sentence imposed was not vindictive.