From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Creek

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Nov 15, 1968
403 F.2d 220 (6th Cir. 1968)

Opinion

No. 18466.

November 15, 1968.

Sheldon M. Rosen, court appointed, Toledo, Ohio, for appellant.

Bernard J. Stuplinski, U.S. Atty., Rolf H. Scheidel, Asst. U.S. Atty., Toledo, Ohio, for appellee.

Before EDWARDS, McCREE and COMBS, Circuit Judges.


Appellant was convicted and sentenced for interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2312 (1964), the Dyer Act. He appeals on the ground that the proofs before the District Judge were insufficient to establish that he had knowledge that the stolen car in which he was arrested was stolen.

Our review of the evidential record indicates that there was ample evidence from which the District Judge could properly have inferred that he did have such knowledge.

Among other evidential factors, appellant's testimony was in direct conflict with that of the owner of the stolen automobile. The District Judge believed the latter. The credibility of witnesses is an issue for the trier of the facts. Butzman v. United States, 205 F.2d 343 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 346 U.S. 828, 74 S.Ct. 50, 98 L.Ed. 353 (1953).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

United States v. Creek

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Nov 15, 1968
403 F.2d 220 (6th Cir. 1968)
Case details for

United States v. Creek

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles CREEK, Jr.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Date published: Nov 15, 1968

Citations

403 F.2d 220 (6th Cir. 1968)

Citing Cases

United States v. Stover

In our view there was substantial evidence on the facts recited to support the jury's inference that he did…

United States v. Narciso

It is, of course, the function of the jury to examine conflicting facts brought out in the trial process and…