Receiving Stolen Property

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

• United States v. Merchant
  693 F.2d 767· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficiently clear, the severance motion was properly denied, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, and the sentence was not an abuse of discretion.
• Gerardo v. State
  355 So. 2d 1221· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-02-21 ·cited 2×
  Rene Gerardo, president of K & G Jewelry, Inc., was convicted of knowingly receiving and retaining stolen jewelry. He appealed arguing he was statutorily immunized from prosecution because he complied with a subpoena duces tecum to produce corporate records that yielded evidence
• Bates v. State
  355 So. 2d 128· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-01-24 ·cited 2×
  Nathan Bates appealed the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained via search warrant, arguing the warrant affidavit lacked sufficient probable cause. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the affidavit met the probable cause standard even without
• Speregen v. State
  351 So. 2d 1074· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-10-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the single transaction rule applies, limiting the appellant to one judgment and one sentence for receiving stolen property, even though parts from four different vehicles were found together.
• Riggs v. State
  340 So. 2d 130· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-12-16 ·cited 2×
  Bill Riggs was convicted of receiving stolen property, but the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction, finding that the State failed to establish the essential element of knowledge that the property was stolen. The court also noted that the charging information
• United States v. Trzcinski
  553 F.2d 851· 3d Cir.· 1976-12-02 ·cited 2×
• Dalton Williams v. State
  340 So. 2d 113· Fla.· 1976-11-30 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for receiving stolen property (heifers) where the state failed to prove the value of the property stolen at trial. Because the jury never fixed the value, it was impossible to determine whether the offense constituted a felony or mi
• Aboy v. State
  334 So. 2d 270· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-05-11 ·cited 2×
• Dalton Williams v. State
  322 So. 2d 613· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-11-14 ·cited 2×
• Hornbrook v. State
  321 So. 2d 127· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-11-05 ·cited 2×
  Raymond Lee Hornbrook appealed his conviction for receiving stolen property, arguing the state failed to prove that the air conditioning units found in his truck were the same units that had been stolen. The court found the appellant's contention had merit because the only identi
• Kirsner v. State
  308 So. 2d 567· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-02-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to support the conviction for receiving stolen property, and the defendant's motion for acquittal should have been granted.
• Cannon v. State
  289 So. 2d 445· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-02-06 ·cited 2×
  Gary Cannon was convicted of receiving and concealing stolen property and sentenced to six months to five years imprisonment. On appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of evidence and alleged a fatal variance between the charging information and proof regarding ownership of the st
• Youngblood v. State
  281 So. 2d 230· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-08-08 ·cited 2×
  Willis Earl Youngblood was convicted of receiving stolen property, but the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed because the State failed to prove the motor was actually stolen—a critical element of the offense. The court found the prosecution's proof deficient despite the ow
• United States v. Townsend
  474 F.2d 209· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that possession of recently stolen property off the military base cannot give rise to an inference that the property was received or concealed on the base.
• United States v. Stanley
  455 F.2d 644· 4th Cir.· 1972-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prosecutor's misstatement to the jury, implying a defense witness's story was recently fabricated, was not harmless error and warranted a new trial.
• Melkun v. State
  244 So. 2d 145· Fla. 2d DCA· 1971-02-17 ·cited 2×
  Appellant Melkun challenged his conviction for receiving a stolen motorcycle on the ground of insufficient evidence. The Florida appellate court affirmed the conviction and held that, regardless of evidence sufficiency, an appellate court cannot review the issue without a trial c
• Lockett v. State
  188 So. 2d 12· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-06-07 ·cited 2×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a conviction for receiving stolen property, holding that the state sufficiently proved ownership of the property and the identity of the stolen goods, despite the lack of direct evidence of corporate incorporation.
• Wright v. United States
  356 F.2d 261· 5th Cir.· 1966-02-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy, interstate transportation, and concealment of stolen bonds, and that the trial court properly denied motions for acquittal.
• Cole v. State
  172 So. 2d 898· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-03-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the M'Naghten rule is the appropriate standard for determining criminal responsibility in insanity defense cases, and the trial court's rejection of the defense was supported by evidence.
• Weller v. Russell
  321 F.2d 848· 3d Cir.· 1963-07-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the search warrant and affidavit were valid, and the search was not unlawful, thus denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Olsen v. State
  75 So. 2d 281· Fla.· 1954-09-14 ·cited 2×
  Victor Olsen, a former Pensacola city patrolman, was convicted of receiving stolen oxygen and acetylene tanks knowing them to have been stolen. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction despite finding trial court error in admitting character evidence, holding the error w
• United States v. Kraw
  194 F.2d 78· 7th Cir.· 1952-01-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence, including the defendant's inconsistent statements and actions, was sufficient to support the trial court's finding of guilty knowledge that the ice cube maker had been stolen.
• United States ex rel. Kennedy v. Burke
  176 F.2d 96· 3d Cir.· 1949-07-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner was not deprived of due process by not having counsel, as the proceedings were not complex and he understood the charges.
• Ira Peeples v. State
  114 Fla. 459· Fla.· 1934-04-03 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions of defendants for breaking and entering and receiving stolen property, finding that while the evidence was not the strongest, the jury had sufficient basis for conviction.
• In re Forfeiture of Retirement Benefits of Eric Houston v. City of Tampa Firefighters & Police Officers' Pension Fund Bd. of Trs.
  297 So. 3d 664· Fla. 2d DCA· 2020-05-29 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court reversed a decision by the Board of Trustees to forfeit Eric Houston's retirement benefits. The court found that Houston's conviction for receiving stolen property did not meet the statutory definition of embezzlement or the "catch-all" provision for forfeitur
• Presson v. State
  146 So. 2d 598· Fla. 1st DCA· 1962-11-01 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court affirmed a conviction for receiving stolen property, with one judge dissenting. The dissent argued that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence, a requirement for conviction based solely on circumstantial evid
• Gantner v. State
  121 So. 2d 668· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-06-15 ·cited 1×
  Gantner was convicted of receiving stolen property valued at less than $100. The trial court sentenced him to one year in county jail, but the appellate court affirmed the conviction but remanded to impose the proper sentence of imprisonment in state prison under Florida statute
• Plaintiff v. Cr. ID No. 2208005255 Shawn N. Williams
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2024-08-30
  The court denied the defendant's Rule 61 Motion for Postconviction Relief and Motion for Modification of Sentence. The court found that the defendant's guilty plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and that all claims raised in his postconviction motions were waived at the
• United States v. Johnson
  970 F.2d 907· D.C. Cir.· 1992-07-31
  The court held that the district court had discretion to exclude alibi witnesses for untimely disclosure but remanded for an explicit explanation of the reasoning. It rejected other arguments regarding evidence of prior crimes and sentencing.
• United States v. Baker
  926 F.2d 179· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-13
  The court held that Federal Rule of Evidence 408 does not preclude admission of statements made during attempted plea negotiations in a criminal case. The court also held that convictions for possession and receipt of stolen goods under 18 U.S.C. § 659 and 18 U.S.C. § 2315 are mu
• United States v. Spencer
  905 F.2d 1260· 9th Cir.· 1990-06-08
  The court held that receiving stolen property under 18 U.S.C. § 662 is not a lesser included offense of theft by taking under 18 U.S.C. § 661, and thus the district court lacked jurisdiction to convict on the § 662 charge after acquitting on the § 661 charge.
• Stanback v. Jones
  878 F.2d 1117· 8th Cir.· 1989-07-14
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the district court did not err in denying the petition or in not appointing counsel.
• United States v. Clark
  701 F.2d 68· 8th Cir.· 1983-03-03
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions to dismiss the indictment, for a mistrial, for a continuance, or in refusing a specific jury instruction.
• Fungone v. State
  391 So. 2d 336· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-12-17
  Wanda Fungone appeals her conviction for receiving stolen property, arguing that hearsay testimony from a police officer regarding a juvenile suspect's statement was improperly admitted over her objection. The appellate court agrees, finding the admission violated her Sixth Amend
• Scott v. State
  388 So. 2d 243· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-08-20
  Florida appellate court reversed a receiving stolen property conviction because the trial court erred in failing to grant a mistrial when the prosecution elicited testimony about the defendant's post-arrest silence, a constitutional violation that could not be cured by jury instr
• Davis v. State
  376 So. 2d 1224· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-11-21
  Richard G. Davis appealed the revocation of his probation and resulting five-year prison sentences. The court reversed and vacated the probation order and revocation on the receiving stolen property charge because the information failed to allege the stolen property's value was $
• Turner v. State
  376 So. 2d 429· Fla. 1st DCA· 1979-10-25
  Patrick Turner was convicted of receiving stolen property, but the trial court improperly amended the information on the morning of trial to add a television set and extend the crime date, converting the charge from a misdemeanor to a felony. The court reversed and remanded for a
• Lancione v. State
  369 So. 2d 79· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-03-06
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to approve plea negotiations or in denying the motion for discharge based on speedy trial rules.
• Leary v. State
  370 So. 2d 1171· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-01-31
• Jones v. State
  365 So. 2d 774· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-12-12
• Edd Shedd v. State
  358 So. 2d 1117· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-05-04
  Edd Shedd was convicted of receiving stolen property after a warrantless search of his home. On appeal, the court reversed because the search warrant described the wrong address (5738 instead of 6573 Blanding Boulevard) and contained materially inaccurate physical descriptions th
• State v. Moore
  356 So. 2d 838· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-03-13
  Florida appeals a discovery order requiring disclosure of the location of a secondary vehicle identification number used to establish that a Corvette was stolen. The court recognizes a public policy privilege protecting such locations but modifies the discovery order to allow ver
• Brown v. State
  355 So. 2d 206· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-02-22
  The court held that only one judgment and sentence may be imposed when a single transaction rule applies to multiple counts of receiving stolen property.
• S. R. C. v. State
  355 So. 2d 470· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-02-21
• S. W. P. v. State
  354 So. 2d 414· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-01-17
  A juvenile who is a principal to the theft of property cannot be adjudicated delinquent for unlawfully receiving the same stolen property.
• United States v. Bracken
  558 F.2d 544· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-29
  A thief can be convicted of receiving stolen property, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Carter v. State
  356 So. 2d 1· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-05-27
  Willie Lee Carter appealed his guilty pleas to receiving and concealing stolen property, arguing the pleas were entered without proper inquiry into defenses and without an adequate factual basis. The court remanded for the trial court to examine whether manifest injustice occurre
• LEO v. State
  345 So. 2d 1104· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-05-20
  The court held that the State sufficiently proved Food Haul, Inc.'s ownership or right to possess the stolen vehicle to withstand the appellant's challenge.
• Liebler v. State
  327 So. 2d 800· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-02-10
  Affirmed conviction for receiving stolen property where substantial competent evidence and suspicious circumstances supported the trial judge's finding that the defendant had knowledge the property was stolen.
• United States v. Wyatt
  523 F.2d 67· 4th Cir.· 1975-09-11
  The court held that the government's delay in providing discoverable material did not constitute reversible error, nor was there insufficient connection with interstate commerce.