430 F.2d 1197 (8th Cir. 1970), 20098, United States v. Metcalf

Docket Nº:20098.
Citation:430 F.2d 1197
Party Name:UNITED STATES fo America, Appellee, v. Richard Dale METCALF, Appellant.
Case Date:September 02, 1970
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Page 1197

430 F.2d 1197 (8th Cir. 1970)

UNITED STATES fo America, Appellee,


Richard Dale METCALF, Appellant.

No. 20098.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Sept. 2, 1970

         Murray L. Randall, St. Louis, Mo., for appellant; Richard L. Daly, St. Louis, Mo., on brief.

         Peter T. Straub, Asst. U.S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for appellee; Daniel Bartlett, Jr., U.S. Atty., St. Louis, mo., on brief.

         Before VAN OOSTERHOUT, Circuit Judge, JOHNSEN, Senior Circuit Judge, and HEANEY, Circuit Judge.

         JOHNSEN, Senior Circuit Judge.

         The appeal is by Richard Dale Metcalf from convictions of (1) possessing goods stolen from an interstate shipment, 18 U.S.C. § 659, and (2) having conspired with others to effect the possession, 18 U.S.C. § 371.

         The violations were made the subject of joint indictment charges against appellant, one Sheppard, his brother-in-law,

Page 1198

and one Stackhouse, a friend of both. The indictment also alleged that one James had participated in the conspiracy, but it did not make him a defendant. Stackhouse pleaded guilty to the charges; dismissal was made on motion of the Government as against Sheppard; and appellant alone was tried. He was sentenced to five years imprisonment on each count, with the sentences to run concurrently.

         There is no contention here that the evidence is insufficient to sustain appellant's conviction, nor on the record before us would it be possible to urge such a contention. In fact, the proof of his guilt is so strong that it would be difficult to see how any jury could reasonably reach a different result. While we need not in this situation detail all the evidence, a statement of some of the facts which the jury could properly find will help to put into proper perspective and significance the single contention of error which appellant's experienced counsel has been able to construct out of the whole of the trial proceedings.

         The single contention made is that the convictions should be reversed for the admission of a bit of testimony on the part of a witness as to a converation which she had overheard between Sheppard and appellant regarding Stackhouse. We find, as discussed later, that the contention is devoid of any substance, and we affirm the convictions.

         The stolen goods consisted of 45 boxes of trousers or 'Levi's' in interstate shipment, which were contained in a trailer standing at...

To continue reading