Dale Edward Wyckoff v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Dale Edward Wyckoff v. United States

314 F.2d 498, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5874

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 14, 1963

Docket19919_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 314 F.2d 498 (Dale Edward Wyckoff v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dale Edward Wyckoff v. United States, 314 F.2d 498, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5874 (5th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was tried to a jury and convicted of the interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle in violation of the Dyer Act. 1 A careful reading of the record fails to disclose sufficient evidence of the quantity and quality necessary to support the verdict of guilt, particularly as to the crucial element, interstate transportation after the vehicle had “been stolen.” The judgment is, therefore, reversed and the case remanded so that a new trial may be had if the Government can produce other evidence which will, in the opinion of the District Court, warrant a new trial. See Hamilton v. United States, 5 Cir., 1962, 304 F.2d 542, and cases therein cited.

Reversed and remanded.

1

. 18 U.S.O.A. § 2312. “Transportation of stolen vehicles

“Whoever transports in interstate or foreign commerce a motor vehicle or aircraft, knowing the same to have been stolen, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was tried to a jury and convicted of the interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle in violation of the Dyer Act. 1 A careful reading of the record fails to disclose sufficient evidence of the quantity and quality necessary to support the verdict of guilt, particularly as to the crucial element, interstate transportation after the vehicle had “been stolen.” The judgment is, therefore, reversed and the case remanded so that a new trial may be had if the Government can produce other evidence which will, in the opinion of the District Court, warrant a new trial. See Hamilton v. United States, 5 Cir., 1962, 304 F.2d 542, and cases therein cited.

Reversed and remanded.

1

. 18 U.S.O.A. § 2312. “Transportation of stolen vehicles

“Whoever transports in interstate or foreign commerce a motor vehicle or aircraft, knowing the same to have been stolen, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

314 F.2d 498, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5874, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dale-edward-wyckoff-v-united-states-ca5-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack