Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
99-4885•United States of America v. Anthony B. Mitchell
99-4885Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit17.05.2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-4885
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ANTHONY B. MITCHELL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (CR-98-69)
Submitted: April 28, 2000 Decided: May 17, 2000
Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry M. Dash, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F.
Fahey, United States Attorney, Damon A. King, Special Assistant
United States Attorney, Fort Monroe, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Following a jury trial, Anthony B. Mitchell was convicted on
one count of larceny of personal property, in violation of 18
U.S.C. §§ 2, 7 (1994) and 18 U.S.C.A. § 661 (West Supp. 1999). The
district court sentenced him to ten months in prison. Mitchell
appeals, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support his
conviction. Evidence presented at trial showed that Mitchell and
Tremell Watson borrowed a screwdriver and Watson testified that
they then used the screwdriver to steal a Plymouth Acclaim on base
at Fort Eustis. Mitchell’s fingerprint was found on the stolen
license plate affixed to the Acclaim. Viewing the evidence in the
light most favorable to the government, we find that there was
sufficient evidence for a rational trier of fact to have found
Mitchell guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See Glasser v. United
States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). Consequently, we affirm Mitchell’s
conviction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.