Legal Opinion
Kinard v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 20, 1980No. 13712PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARRIS, Associate Judge:
Appellant was convicted by a jury of attempted petit larceny. D.C. Code 1973, §§ 22-103, -2202. He contends that the trial judge erred in refusing to give the jury the so-called “falsus in uno” instruction. 1 We affirm.
I
Appellant’s trial was brief. The first of the government’s two witnesses was Henry Tydings, a special police officer for the Hecht Company department stores. He testified that while he was on duty in the linen department of the downtown store, he saw appellant remove a Hecht Company shopping bag from a canvas bag appellant was carrying and place what…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Virginian Ry. Co. v. ArmentroutCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1948
- State v. LeavittSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1968
- Raia v. TopehiusSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- Gregory v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- People v. TurnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Payne v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Gayden v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Smith v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- Lawson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.