United States v. Joyce Arlena Hill, A/K/A Marion Kirk, A/K/A Janet Davenport

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Joyce Arlena Hill, A/K/A Marion Kirk, A/K/A Janet Davenport

468 F.2d 899, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 6897

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided November 2, 1972·No. 72-2308·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of having transported and caused to be transported in interstate commerce a falsely made and forged bank check, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314. Her contention on appeal is that since there was no proof that she personally transported in interstate commerce the check in question there was no federally cognizable offense and the Court was without jurisdiction to convict.

Appellant’s contention is without merit. The law is well settled that the interstate commerce requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 2314 is satisfied when a person knowingly cashes a fraudulent check in one state drawn on a bank in another state. Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 74 S.Ct. 358, 98 L.Ed. 435 (1954); Rickey v. United States, 5 Cir., 1957, 242 F.2d 583; Hubsch v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 256 F.2d 820; United States v. Webb, 5 Cir., 1971, 443 F.2d 308. This is exactly what the Government proved — appellant knowingly cashed a forged check in Texas, which check had been drawn on a bank in Tennessee.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of having transported and caused to be transported in interstate commerce a falsely made and forged bank check, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314. Her contention on appeal is that since there was no proof that she personally transported in interstate commerce the check in question there was no federally cognizable offense and the Court was without jurisdiction to convict.

Appellant’s contention is without merit. The law is well settled that the interstate commerce requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 2314 is satisfied when a person knowingly cashes a fraudulent check in one state drawn on a bank in another state. Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 74 S.Ct. 358, 98 L.Ed. 435 (1954); Rickey v. United States, 5 Cir., 1957, 242 F.2d 583; Hubsch v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 256 F.2d 820; United States v. Webb, 5 Cir., 1971, 443 F.2d 308. This is exactly what the Government proved — appellant knowingly cashed a forged check in Texas, which check had been drawn on a bank in Tennessee.

Affirmed.

United States v. Joyce Arlena Hill, A/K/A Marion Kirk, A/K/A Janet Davenport, 468 F.2d 899, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 6897 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

468 F.2d 899 (United States v. Joyce Arlena Hill, A/K/A Marion Kirk, A/K/A Janet Davenport) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related