Webb v. United States, 8057.
| Decision Date | 18 June 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 8057.,8057. |
| Citation | 347 F.2d 363 |
| Parties | Leroy WEBB, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
James A. Tilker, Cheyenne, Wyo., for defendant.
John E. Green, Asst. U. S. Atty. (B. Andrew Potter, U. S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee.
Before PHILLIPS, LEWIS and HILL, Circuit Judges.
Appellant was convicted upon a single count indictment which charged him with the unlawful possession of stolen mail, knowing the same to have been stolen, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708. He appeals, asserting that the evidence was insufficient to establish the fact that the subject letter, containing an Oklahoma state welfare check, was ever mailed and, as a corollary to such appellate claim, that the court erred in instructing the jury.
The subject check, payable to one Delia McDaniel in the amount of $73.00 and dated January 1, 1964, was cashed by appellant on January 2, 1964, an occurrence which appellant denied and attempted to refute by testimony of alibi but which was proved by direct and convincing evidence. The check had never been received by the payee, Mrs. McDaniel, and her signature was forged thereon. Mrs. McDaniel's mailing address was Box 29, Route 1, Choctaw, Oklahoma.
To establish the jurisdictional fact that the McDaniel check had been mailed, the government relied upon testimony establishing the routine of the Oklahoma Department of Welfare in preparing and delivering its monthly warrants. The evidence showed that the McDaniel check was one of some 114,000 similar warrants prepared from the December, 1963, registry lists of the department for delivery by mail to the recipients. The warrants are mechanically stuffed, sealed and stamped, placed in mail bags, and then picked up by the Post Office on the last day of each month for delivery on the first day of each month. Departmental records showed no deviation from the routine regarding the McDaniel check and did show prompt delivery of other checks in the area of Route 1, Choctaw. In fact, a check addressed to appellant's girl friend and with whom he was living was delivered to Box 22K, Route 1, Choctaw.
We have no doubt that the proof of the routine procedures of the Oklahoma Welfare Department in the preparation and mailing of welfare checks is sufficient to support a permissible inference that this particular check reached the United States mails. It is true that the testimony relating to mailing does not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Iverson
...if the conclusion flows from logical and probabilistic reasoning.") (citation and quotation marks omitted); Webb v. United States, 347 F.2d 363, 364 (10th Cir.1965)("[T]he jury's function [in a criminal case] is broad enough to allow it to make common sense inferences from proven facts...."......
-
United States v. Lynn, 71-1655.
...Pinelli v. United States, 403 F.2d 998 (10th Cir. 1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 968, 89 S.Ct. 2116, 23 L.Ed.2d 755; Webb v. United States, 347 F.2d 363 (10th Cir.1965). 3 Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451 (10th Cir. 1960); Palmer v. United States, 229 F.2d 861 (10th Cir. 1956), cert. den......
-
U.S. v. Daughtry, 80-1656
...he knowingly possessed the stolen checks. Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 37 L.Ed.2d 380 (1973); Webb v. United States, 347 F.2d 363 (10th Cir. 1965); United States v. Hines, supra. The evidence thus conformed to, and proved, the indictment's charge of possession of st......
-
United States v. Gardner, 26495.
...he possessed was stolen from the mails, relying on Allen v. United States, 387 F.2d 641, 642 (5th Cir. 1968), and Webb v. United States, 347 F.2d 363, 364 (10th Cir. 1965). The government argues that it is not required to prove that appellant knew the items were stolen from the mails but on......