White v. United States, 8461.

Decision Date12 September 1966
Docket NumberNo. 8461.,8461.
PartiesRichard T. WHITE, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

Russell Shultz, Wichita, Kan., for appellant.

Benjamin E. Franklin, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Newell A. George, U. S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee.

Before PICKETT, LEWIS and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PICKETT, Circuit Judge.

White appeals from a sentence imposed after conviction on an information charging him with aiding, abetting, inducing and procuring Melvin Morris Kernick, Reynold D. McCarty and Jesse Rand Howard wilfully and unlawfully to transport in interstate commerce a 1963 Cadillac automobile, knowing it to have been stolen.1 18 U.S.C. § 2; 18 U.S.C. § 2312. The only question which merits consideration here is whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain White's conviction as an aider and abettor.

White, an automobile mechanic, was operating a machine shop in Wichita, Kansas, where he was engaged in the rebuilding and sale of wrecked automobiles. In November, 1963, he purchased a 1963 Cadillac which had been wrecked and declared beyond repair. He retained the title and, after removing the serial number plate, sold the vehicle for salvage. Early in 1964, he mortgaged this automobile to a local bank as security for a loan. In the latter part of May, 1964, White met with Kernick, who was engaged in a like business in Wichita, and told him that he was in need of a 1963 Cadillac similar to the one described in the mortgage. He requested Kernick to make arrangements with someone to supply such an automobile. After several conversations, Kernick informed White that he had two men who would undertake to obtain the automobile for $800.00. Kernick was advised to proceed with the deal. It was agreed that after a sale of the automobile, the suppliers would be paid $800.00 and that after paying this sum and the amount due on the mortgage, the balance of the sale proceeds would then be divided between them.

A short time thereafter, Kernick made arrangements with McCarty and Howard to acquire such an automobile in a state other than Kansas. They proceeded to Springfield, Missouri and from there to Kansas City, Missouri, where they located an automobile which met the needs of White. It was stolen from a parking lot and delivered to Kernick at his place of business in Wichita at about midnight. Kernick immediately delivered the automobile to White, and they removed the serial number plate and replaced it with the serial number which had been taken from the wrecked vehicle. White thereafter sold the vehicle for $4,050.00. Kernick testified that he received $1,250.00 from White, $800.00 of which he paid to McCarty and Howard. White said he paid $1,600.00 to Kernick.

18 U.S.C. § 2(a) provides that "whoever commits an offense against the United States, or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, or procures its commission, is a principal." Aiding and abetting, as used in the statute, means to assist the perpetrator of a crime. United States v. Williams, 341 U.S. 58, 71 S.Ct. 595, 95 L.Ed. 747. As this court said in Roth v. United States, 10 Cir., 339 F.2d 863, 865, "To be an aider and abettor requires that a defendant `associate himself with the venture, that he participate in it as in something that he wishes to bring about, that he seek by his action to make it...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Com. v. French
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • May 4, 1970
    ...(9th Cir.--accessory may work through an intermediary); Massicot v. United States, 254 F.2d 58, 64--65 (5th Cir.); White v. United States, 366 F.2d 474, 476 (10th Cir.). Cf. COMMONWEALTH V. PERRY, 256 N.E.2D 745,F (evidence showed only that defendant knew and associated with active particip......
  • United States v. Harris
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • August 12, 1970
    ...qua non of aiding and abetting * * * is guilty participation by the accused;" and as recognized by the court in White v. United States, 366 F.2d 474, 476 (10th Cir. 1966) "aiding and abetting implies guilty The other essential elements in a conviction for finding and abetting are (1) the fa......
  • U.S. v. Langston
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • July 2, 1992
    ...charged." (footnotes omitted) See also, Nye & Nissen v. United States, 336 U.S. 613, 69 S.Ct. 766, 93 L.Ed. 919.... White v. United States, 366 F.2d 474, 476 (10th Cir.1966); see also, e.g., United States v. Peoni, 100 F.2d 401, 402 (2d Cir.1938) (stating general requirements of aiding and ......
  • United States v. Smallwood
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • June 14, 1971
    ...v. United States, 405 F.2d 102 (8th Cir. 1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 938, 89 S.Ct. 2003, 23 L.Ed.2d 453 (1969); White v. United States, 366 F.2d 474 (10th Cir. 1966). We hold this was a jury question. It appears to us that the most that can be said of Conell's case is that there was an inc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT