United States v. Robert Tucker

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Robert Tucker

486 F.2d 1040, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 7578

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedOctober 11, 1973

Docket73-1424

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 486 F.2d 1040 (United States v. Robert Tucker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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. Robert Tucker, 486 F.2d 1040, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 7578 (8th Cir. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Robert Tucker, was convicted of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314, in causing to be transported in interstate commerce two forged money orders. He objects on appeal to the following instruction given below:

“Possession of property recently stolen, if not satisfactorily explained, is ordinarily a circumstance from which the jury may reasonably draw the inference and find in the light of surrounding circumstances shown by the evidence in the case, that the person in possession knew the property had been stolen.”

The appellant argues that this instruction places an unconstitutional burden on the defendant tp introduce evidence in his behalf and to testify in violation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. He also argues that the instruction contradicts two other instructions which informed the jury that no inference of guilt may be drawn from the defendant’s failure to testify, and that the law never imposes on the defendant the burden of testifying in his behalf or calling any witnesses.

In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 37 L.Ed.2d 380 (1973), decided June 18, 1973, directly rejecting these contentions, we find the appellant’s appeal to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Robert Tucker, was convicted of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314, in causing to be transported in interstate commerce two forged money orders. He objects on appeal to the following instruction given below:

“Possession of property recently stolen, if not satisfactorily explained, is ordinarily a circumstance from which the jury may reasonably draw the inference and find in the light of surrounding circumstances shown by the evidence in the case, that the person in possession knew the property had been stolen.”

The appellant argues that this instruction places an unconstitutional burden on the defendant tp introduce evidence in his behalf and to testify in violation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. He also argues that the instruction contradicts two other instructions which informed the jury that no inference of guilt may be drawn from the defendant’s failure to testify, and that the law never imposes on the defendant the burden of testifying in his behalf or calling any witnesses.

In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 37 L.Ed.2d 380 (1973), decided June 18, 1973, directly rejecting these contentions, we find the appellant’s appeal to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

486 F.2d 1040, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 7578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-robert-tucker-ca8-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack