United States v. Daniel H. Sher

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Daniel H. Sher

418 F.2d 914, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 9797

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 8, 1969

Docket23748_1

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 418 F.2d 914 (United States v. Daniel H. Sher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Daniel H. Sher, 418 F.2d 914, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 9797 (9th Cir. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of selling Government property without authority in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641. The property sold was a blank selective service registration form or “draft card.” There was no proof of how it came into appellant’s possession.

Appellant contends that to establish guilt under § 641 the Government has the burden of proving that the property sold *915 was stolen from the Government. He asserts that there was no such proof here. He assigns as error the failure of the court so to instruct the jury.

We must reject appellant’s contentions. He was not charged with theft or with sale of stolen property. He was charged with sale of Government property without authority. Theft is not an element of this offense; Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 72 S.Ct. 240, 96 L.Ed. 288 (1952), is inapplicable. Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of selling Government property without authority in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641. The property sold was a blank selective service registration form or “draft card.” There was no proof of how it came into appellant’s possession.

Appellant contends that to establish guilt under § 641 the Government has the burden of proving that the property sold *915 was stolen from the Government. He asserts that there was no such proof here. He assigns as error the failure of the court so to instruct the jury.

We must reject appellant’s contentions. He was not charged with theft or with sale of stolen property. He was charged with sale of Government property without authority. Theft is not an element of this offense; Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 72 S.Ct. 240, 96 L.Ed. 288 (1952), is inapplicable. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

418 F.2d 914, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 9797, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-daniel-h-sher-ca9-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack