United States v. Norman Patrick Benefield

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Norman Patrick Benefield

443 F.2d 61, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10140

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 18, 1971

Docket26430_1

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 443 F.2d 61 (United States v. Norman Patrick Benefield) 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. Norman Patrick Benefield, 443 F.2d 61, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10140 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Norman Benefield appeals from a conviction by a jury of a violation of 18 U. S. C. § 472 (possession of counterfeit money with intent to defraud) and 18 U.S.C. § 473 (transfer and delivery of counterfeit money with the intent that it be passed as genuine).

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict. We affirm.

The appellant presented evidence of alibi witnesses. They were apparently not believed. The government presented testimony of his possession of the counterfeit twenty-dollar bills and his attempts to utter them as genuine in a department store with the assistance of an accomplice. It is not necessary in order for the crime to be committed that the possessor personally circulate them. If he gives them to a confederate with the intent that they be passed as genuine by the accomplice, the offense is complete. See United States v. Hargrave, 416 F.2d 966 (4th Cir. 1969); Hart v. United States, 396 F.2d 243, 245 (8th Cir. 1968); Riggs v. United States, 280 F.2d 750 (5th Cir. 1960).

There was testimony to support that theory here.

Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Norman Benefield appeals from a conviction by a jury of a violation of 18 U. S. C. § 472 (possession of counterfeit money with intent to defraud) and 18 U.S.C. § 473 (transfer and delivery of counterfeit money with the intent that it be passed as genuine).

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict. We affirm.

The appellant presented evidence of alibi witnesses. They were apparently not believed. The government presented testimony of his possession of the counterfeit twenty-dollar bills and his attempts to utter them as genuine in a department store with the assistance of an accomplice. It is not necessary in order for the crime to be committed that the possessor personally circulate them. If he gives them to a confederate with the intent that they be passed as genuine by the accomplice, the offense is complete. See United States v. Hargrave, 416 F.2d 966 (4th Cir. 1969); Hart v. United States, 396 F.2d 243, 245 (8th Cir. 1968); Riggs v. United States, 280 F.2d 750 (5th Cir. 1960).

There was testimony to support that theory here.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

443 F.2d 61, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-norman-patrick-benefield-ca9-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack