Theodore Wood v. United States

D.C. Circuit

Theodore Wood v. United States

344 F.2d 548

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedApril 20, 1965

Docket18773_1

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 344 F.2d 548 (Theodore Wood v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Theodore Wood v. United States, 344 F.2d 548 (D.C. Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a conviction for housebreaking and petty larceny. Testimony at trial established that someone had entered the robbed home— either through the opened second-floor skylight or by breaking a lock on the backyard gate — and had removed a television set, some clothing and a ring. Appellant’s sister, who lived next door to the robbed home, testified that appellant brought a television set to her house at approximately noon on February 27, 1964. Others testified that the theft took place at that time, and that it was the stolen television set which appellant took to his sister’s. Since there was testimony that appellant possessed stolen property so near to the time and place of the theft, the jury may infer guilt both of larceny and housebreaking. Edwards v. United States, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 226, 139 F.2d 365, cert. denied, 321 U.S. 769, 64 S.Ct. 523, 88 L.Ed. 1064 (1944); Wright v. United States, 89 U.S.App.D.C. 70, 189 F.2d 699 (1951); McNamara v. Henkel, 226 U.S. 520, 33 S.Ct. 146, 57 L.Ed. 330 (1913). See McAbee v. United States, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 74, 294 F.2d 703, cert. denied, 368 U.S. 961, 82 S.Ct. 406, 7 L.Ed.2d 392 (1961).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a conviction for housebreaking and petty larceny. Testimony at trial established that someone had entered the robbed home— either through the opened second-floor skylight or by breaking a lock on the backyard gate — and had removed a television set, some clothing and a ring. Appellant’s sister, who lived next door to the robbed home, testified that appellant brought a television set to her house at approximately noon on February 27, 1964. Others testified that the theft took place at that time, and that it was the stolen television set which appellant took to his sister’s. Since there was testimony that appellant possessed stolen property so near to the time and place of the theft, the jury may infer guilt both of larceny and housebreaking. Edwards v. United States, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 226, 139 F.2d 365, cert. denied, 321 U.S. 769, 64 S.Ct. 523, 88 L.Ed. 1064 (1944); Wright v. United States, 89 U.S.App.D.C. 70, 189 F.2d 699 (1951); McNamara v. Henkel, 226 U.S. 520, 33 S.Ct. 146, 57 L.Ed. 330 (1913). See McAbee v. United States, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 74, 294 F.2d 703, cert. denied, 368 U.S. 961, 82 S.Ct. 406, 7 L.Ed.2d 392 (1961).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

344 F.2d 548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/theodore-wood-v-united-states-cadc-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack