Receiving Stolen Property

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

• Feit v. State
  312 So. 2d 469· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-05-16
  Carl Feit was convicted by jury of buying, receiving, and concealing stolen property based on his purchase of a riding lawn mower from two young men who had stolen it. The Florida appellate court reversed the conviction, finding the evidence insufficient to prove Feit knew or sho
• State v. Jackson
  300 So. 2d 37· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-09-17
  Florida appeals the dismissal of charges against Jackson for receiving stolen property (credit cards and driver's license). The trial court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on the low value of the stolen items and resulting misdemeanor classification. The appellate court
• Gilbert v. State
  287 So. 2d 105· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-12-21
• Crumbsley v. State
  284 So. 2d 401· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-10-23
  The evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for receiving stolen property.
• United States v. Kandis
  484 F.2d 67· 3d Cir.· 1973-09-13
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for conspiracy and transporting stolen securities was valid, and a reference to his criminal record was permissible.
• Amoroso v. State
  280 So. 2d 517· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-07-10
  Defendant's conviction for buying and receiving stolen property was reversed because the evidence showed he was a principal in the larceny itself, not merely a receiver of stolen goods, and he could not be convicted of receiving property he helped steal.
• Rayfield D. Lewis v. State
  277 So. 2d 842· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-05-29
• Sikes v. State
  276 So. 2d 519· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-03-27
• United States v. Rohland
  468 F.2d 238· 3d Cir.· 1972-10-19
  The court held that the appellant's contentions on appeal lacked merit and affirmed the conviction.
• United States v. Genareo
  467 F.2d 476· 3d Cir.· 1972-09-12
  The court held that the inspection of the defendant's records did not violate the Fourth Amendment because the defendant consented to the search and the inspection was conducted under a valid statute.
• Robinson v. State
  257 So. 2d 300· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-02-01
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish a prima facie case for knowingly receiving stolen property.
• United States v. Goldner
  439 F.2d 143· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-05
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellants on the substantive counts and that Goldner's arrest was based on probable cause.
• Thomas A. Guerro (and three others) v. Commissioner Fitzpatrick
  436 F.2d 378· 1st Cir.· 1971-01-26
  The court held that the petitioner's convictions and cumulative sentences for motor vehicle crimes were not unconstitutional and affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Smith v. State
  228 So. 2d 440· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-11-26
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the property found in the defendant's possession was identical to the property stolen.
• Thomas v. State
  216 So. 2d 25· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-11-26
  Robert Lee Thomas was convicted of buying, receiving, or aiding in the concealment of a stolen 1965 Ford Mustang in violation of Florida law. The appellate court reversed because the evidence proved theft of the automobile in New York, not the crime of receiving or concealing sto
• United States v. Cottage
  354 F.2d 975· 6th Cir.· 1965-12-30
  A judgment of commitment may be affirmed if supported by a valid conviction on one count, even if another count's conviction is invalid, provided sentences are concurrent and of equal length.
• Cornell McKNIGHT and LeRoy McKnight v. State
  157 So. 2d 852· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-11-22
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support LeRoy McKnight's conviction for receiving stolen goods, but sufficient for Cornell McKnight's conviction.
• Raymond v. Tomer and Anna Bradley
  291 F.2d 685· 5th Cir.· 1961-06-23
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were valid because the evidence supported the jury's verdict and any objections to jury instructions were not properly preserved for appeal.
• United States v. Norton I. Kretske
  220 F.2d 785· 7th Cir.· 1955-03-18
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting expert testimony on the value of the paintings, restricting cross-examination, denying a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, or in its jury instructions.
• Goldberg v. United States
  213 F.2d 734· 4th Cir.· 1954-06-14
  The admission of prior unsworn statements by a witness for corroboration, even if containing some inaccuracies, is not prejudicial error when other ample evidence supports the verdict and the defense had the opportunity to cross-examine.
• United States v. Alfano
  155 F.2d 520· 3d Cir.· 1946-05-14
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to charge the offense of receiving stolen property, despite a minor omission.
• United States v. Minneci
  142 F.2d 428· 2d Cir.· 1944-04-24
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of receiving, concealing, and facilitating the transportation of unlawfully imported gold bullion.
• Forrest v. State
  140 Fla. 374· Fla.· 1939-10-27
  Thomas W. Forrest appeals the validity of his sentence for buying, receiving, and aiding in the concealment of stolen property. The Florida Supreme Court affirms that his six-month county jail sentence with hard labor substantially complies with applicable law and is valid.
• Vann v. State
  127 Fla. 728· Fla.· 1937-04-19
  James Vann appeals his conviction for unlawfully receiving stolen property. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the conviction, finding the evidence sufficient and rejecting challenges to the trial court's jury instructions.
• Callie Infinger v. State
  118 Fla. 767· Fla.· 1935-03-15
  Callie Infinger and Avery Infinger were convicted of grand larceny, and Willie Pickeron was convicted of receiving stolen property. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, rejecting arguments that the evidence was insufficient and that a minor variance in the victim's
• Younis v. State
  116 Fla. 696· Fla.· 1934-09-28
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for receiving stolen property, finding the evidence insufficient to prove the defendant's guilty knowledge.
• Evans v. State
  107 Fla. 853· Fla.· 1932-11-22
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for receiving stolen property as to one defendant but reversed it for another due to insufficient evidence, holding that while some assignments of error were settled by precedent, the evidence did not support the conviction for one
• Ivy Reynolds v. State
  100 Fla. 1509· Fla.· 1930-12-17
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for receiving stolen property, holding that any errors related to the search warrant and affidavit were harmless due to sufficient independent evidence.
• Pappas v. State
  92 Fla. 997· Fla.· 1926-11-29
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for receiving and concealing stolen property, finding that while some procedural irregularities may have occurred, they did not constitute prejudicial error and the evidence supported the jury's verdict.
• Talbert Tucker and Elliot Tucker v. State
  90 Fla. 59· Fla.· 1925-06-24
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for receiving stolen property due to a fatal variance between the charges and the evidence presented. The court found that the defendants were charged with receiving live cattle but the proof only showed they received carcasses and
• Cunningham v. State
  85 Fla. 193· Fla.· 1923-02-23
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for receiving stolen goods, holding that the trial court did not err in denying a motion to elect counts and that sufficient evidence supported the verdict.
• Antone v. State
  76 Fla. 234· Fla.· 1918-08-10
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a larceny conviction, finding the evidence insufficient for one defendant but sufficient for the other. The court affirmed the conviction for one defendant while reversing it for the other, as the judgment was severable.
• Isaiah H. Spears v. State
  59 Fla. 44· Fla.· 1910-01-01
  Isaiah Spears was convicted of forgery and uttering a forged note allegedly altered from $50 to $150, but the Florida Supreme Court reversed and granted a new trial because the alleged forged note was never introduced into evidence, making the conviction rest on weak circumstanti
• Minor v. State
  55 Fla. 71· Fla.· 1908-01-01
  D. A. Minor was convicted of feloniously receiving stolen cigars and sentenced to state prison. On appeal, Minor challenged the trial court's refusal to give certain jury instructions regarding circumstantial evidence and reasonable doubt, but the Florida Supreme Court found no r
• Gabriel v. State
  44 Fla. 57· Fla.· 1902-01-01
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for receiving stolen property, holding that the jury instructions were flawed. The court found that the jury should have been instructed that the state must prove the defendant received the property as described in the indictment, n