WILLIAM CHEW, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the defendant's conviction for grand larceny should be affirmed because the lack of objection to hearsay evidence of value waived the issue on appeal, and no instruction on petit larceny was required.
The appellant was convicted of grand larceny after being seen stealing seven sport coats. The only evidence of the coats' value was hearsay, stating t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Included Offense cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant was convicted of grand', larceny. He was seen in the act of stealing seven sport coats in a department store. He argues on appeal that a verdict of acquittal should have been directed because the Government failed to prove a-, value of at least $100 which, in this jurisdiction, is essential to a conviction of' grand larceny. Section 22-2201, D.C., Code (1961). He also complains of the-court’s failure to instruct on the included, offense of petit larceny.
The only proof of value was a-hearsay statement that the coats cost the-store $22.32 each — an aggregate of more-than $100 — but the appellant did not object. Had he done so, the prosecution would have had an opportunity to introduce direct evidence of value. In such-circumstances, we do not consider it proper to notice the error, although we may-do so under Rule 52(b), Fed.R.Crim.P., 18 U.S.C.A. It was unnecessary to instruct onpetit larceny because there was nothing- in the evidence to indicate a value of less than $100. Burcham v. United States, 82 U.S.App.D.C. 283, 163 F. 2d 761 (1947). Moreover, such an instruction was not requested and no objection to its omission was made.
Affirmed.