FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 7 - CHAPTER 97
Go to Volume 7 Table of Contents - Go to Chapter 97 Table of Contents

97.1 Receiving/Possession Of Stolen Property: Links To Other Sources

    97.2.1 Theft And Receiving: Whether Thief May Be Convicted Of Both
    97.2.2 Challenge To Charges For Both Receiving Stolen Property And Theft Or Burglary Of The Same Property

FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 7 - CHAPTER 97

PRACTICE NOTE: Absent certain exceptions, a thief should not be convicted of both receiving the property and theft. (See People v. Allen (CA 1999) 21 C4th 846, 853 [99 CR2d 279]; see also People v. Jaramillo (CA 1976) 16 C3d 752, 757 [129 CR 306]; People v. Stewart (IL 1960) 169 NE2d 796, 799 [property must have in fact been stolen by persons other than one charged with receiving it]; State v. Magers (MO 1970) 452 SW2d 198, 199 [proof of receipt of property involved is necessary to establish that offense of receiving stolen property has been committed since actual thief and receiver must be differentiated].)

    However, it has been held that the thief may be separately convicted of receiving. (See Allen, 21 C4th at 866.)

See FORECITE National™ 97.1.2 [Receiving Possession of Stolen Property: Federal Circuit Model Instructions And Notes].

FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 7 - CHAPTER 97

    97.2.2    Challenge To Charges For Both Receiving Stolen Property And Theft Or Burglary Of The Same Property

PRACTICE NOTE: People v. Landis (CA 1996) 51 CA4th 1247, 1253 [59 CR2d 641] held that dual conviction for burglary and receiving stolen property is permissible. In so doing, Landis disagreed with People v. Lawrence (CA 1980) 111 CA3d 630, 639 [169 CR 245] and People v. Perez (CA 1974) 40 CA3d 795, 800 [115 CR 405] which interpreted People v. Jaramillo (CA 1976) 16 C3d 752 [129 CR 306] to preclude conviction for both burglary and receiving stolen goods. Landis concluded that it would be inconsistent to permit dual convictions for burglary and theft but bar dual convictions for burglary and receiving stolen goods. (Landis, 51 CA4th at 1255; see also People v. Carr (CA 1998) 66 CA4th 109 [77 CR2d 639]; but see People v. Stewart (IL 1960)169 NE2d 796, 799 [property must have in fact been stolen by persons other than one charged with receiving it]; State v. Magers (MO 1970) 452 SW2d 198, 199 [proof of receipt of property involved is necessary to establish that offense of receiving stolen property has been committed since actual thief and receiver must be differentiated].)

    People v. Carr (CA 1998) 66 CA4th 109, 110 [77 CR2d 639] held that a defendant may be convicted both of burglary and receiving property stolen in the burglary.

    See FORECITE National™ 97.2.1 [Theft And Receiving: Whether Thief May Be Convicted Of Both].

RESEARCH NOTES:

Wharton’s Criminal Law (West, 15th ed. 1993) § 440, p. 596; see also 1998 Supplement, p. 49.

Annotation, Participation In Larceny Or Theft As Precluding Conviction For Receiving Or Concealing The Stolen Property, 29 ALR5th 59.

RELATED FEDERAL MODEL:

See FORECITE National™ 97.1.2 [Receiving Possession of Stolen Property: Federal Circuit Model Instructions And Notes].