United States v. Moore, 72-1045.
Decision Date | 01 June 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 72-1045.,72-1045. |
Citation | 460 F.2d 1265 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Orville MOORE, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
John W. Core, Lexington, Ky., for defendant-appellant.
William D. Kirkland, Asst. U. S. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee; Eugene E. Siler, Jr., U. S. Atty., Lexington, Ky., on brief.
Before WEICK and EDWARDS, Circuit Judges, and CECIL, Senior Circuit
Appellant appeals his conviction by a jury for interstate transportation of a motor vehicle, knowing it to be stolen, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2312 (1970).
After he testified naming two individuals (who were never located) as being involved in possession of the subject automobile, the government sought and the District Judge gave a charge on aiding and abetting. Appellant contends that since he was indicted as a principal in the offense of transportation of a stolen vehicle, and no mention in the indictment of aiding and abetting was made, that this instruction was error and that his conviction must be set aside.
It appears to be settled law in this circuit, however, that an aider and abettor can be convicted as a principal. 18 U.S.C. § 2 (1970); United States v. Milby, 400 F.2d 702, 706-708 (6th Cir. 1968). This appears to be particularly appropriate where defendant's own testimony (as here) suggests that others served as principals in the commission of the crime. United States v. Duke, 409 F.2d 669 (4th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1062, 90 S.Ct. 1497, 25 L.Ed.2d 683 (1970). The United States Supreme Court provides this underpinning for these rulings:
Nye & Nissen v. United States, 336 U.S. 613, 620, 69 S.Ct. 766, 770, 93 L.Ed. 919 (1949).
The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
U.S. v. Osborne
...Sixth Circuit determined this was not necessary because aiders and abettors can be charged directly as principals.)); United States v. Moore, 460 F.2d 1265 (6th Cir.1972) (The Sixth Circuit considers "aiding and abetting merely a theory of liability, not an offense distinct in and of itself......
-
Halverson v. Simpson
...commission although not named in the indictment as an aider and abettor without violating federal due process."); United States v. Moore 460 F.2d 1265, 1265 (6th Cir. 1972) (holding that it was proper for the court to give an aiding and abetting instruction when the defendant was indicted a......
-
Demink v. United States
...commission although not named in the indictment as an aider and abettor without violating federal due process."); United States v. Moore, 460 F.2d 1265, 1266 (6th Cir.1972).Id. at 695. Thus, the Indictment was not deficient for failing to charge Demink in Counts 3, 7 and 11under a theory of......
-
U.S. v. McGee
...commission although not named in the indictment as an aider and abettor without violating federal due process."); United States v. Moore, 460 F.2d 1265, 1266 (6th Cir.1972). Thus, an indictment need not explicitly refer to aiding or abetting to support a jury verdict based on a finding unde......