Legal Opinion

City of Maumee v. Geiger

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1976No. 75-519PublishedCited by 94 opinions

1Per curiam

The question presented is whether a person may properly be tried and convicted for receiving *240stolen property after he admits the actual, theft of that same property. ■ '

Section 134.17 of the Maumee Municipal Code and R. C. 2913.51 use the same language to identify the crime of receiving stolen property: “No person shall receive, retain, or dispose of property of another, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe it has been obtained through commission of a theft offense. * * *”

Appellants admit their roles as thieves in this cause, and rely upon the following cases for their proposition…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Milanovich v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. State v. BottaOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Cartwright v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1944
  4. State v. TindallSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1948

3Cited by94 opinions

  1. State v. JohnsonOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  2. State v. WhitfieldOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  3. State v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  4. State v. CabralesOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  5. State v. RobertsOhio Supreme Court · 1980

89 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API