United States v. James Lee King
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Per curiam
Appellant appeals from a conviction under the Dyer Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2312, contending that the court below erred in failing to grant judgment of acquittal because the Government did not present substantial evidence that the car in question had been stolen. We affirm.
There are three elements under this section of the Dyer Act which the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) the vehicle was “stolen”, (2) the defendant transported it in interstate commerce, and (3) the defendant had knowledge that it was “stolen”. Dixon v. United States, 8 Cir., 1961, 295 F.2d 396. From the evidence…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. TurleySupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Leonard Thomas Dixon v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1961
- Troy Arthur Burke, Jr. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1968
- William Michael Webb v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967
- Gerald Henry Battles v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States v. Major Ellis Harris and Henry HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
- United States v. Raymond Glen ThurmondCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1976
- United States v. Franklin Johnson, A/K/A Franklin O'Neil Johnson, James Earl JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
- United States v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
- United States v. Richard Owen LongCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.