UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
CARL ROSS KEATON, APPELLANT

4th Cir. | 1965-07-22
No. 9857
349 F.2d 374 United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (1965)

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.


Holding

The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict and that the jury charge was adequate.


Facts & Procedural History

The defendant was convicted of violating the Dyer Act after being found in possession of a stolen car. Evidence showed he was in the vicinity of the 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.

Topics

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dyer Act cases and more on FLexlaw


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

The defendant, convicted of a violation of the Dyer Act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 2312, prosecutes this appeal.

The court finds no merit in his contention that there was insufficient evidence to show that he had ever been in possession of the stolen car. Evidence was presented by the Government to show that the defendant was in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, when the car was stolen; that he was in Mocksville, North Carolina, where the car was discovered, several days after the theft; that he offered to sell the car to a used car dealer in Mocksville, agreed on a price, and received partial payment; that the used car dealer then obtained possession of the car; and that the defendant offered to sell a car exactly like the stolen vehicle to a third party while it was parked in the prospective customer’s driveway. This evidence was adequate to support the jury’s verdict that the defendant had been in possession of the stolen car. Defendant’s attack on the adequacy of the charge to the jury is similarly unavailing. The charge, when read as a whole, was eminently fair to the defendant.

The decision of the District Court is therefore

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw