Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

United States v. Walter Robert Dickson

United States v. Walter Robert Dickson, 462 F.2d 184 (4th Cir. 1972)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1972-06-13
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. Walter Robert Dickson appeals his conviction for the interstate transportation of a falsely made and forged security in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314. Finding no error we affirm. The definition of a security in 18 U.S.C. § 2311 includes a document “transferring or assigning any right, title, or interest in or to goods, wares, and merchandise . . .’’On consideration of the briefs, record, and argument, we conclude that the district court properly ruled that this definition of a security embraced a “statement of source of title” of a motor vehicle and that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the judgment. Affirmed.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Walter Robert Dickson. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
7 opinions
UNITED STATES v. DICKSON,462 F.2d 184(4th Cir. 1972)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE v. WALTER ROBERT DICKSON, APPELLANT.
No. 72-1141.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Argued June 6, 1972.
Decided June 13, 1972.
Warren J. Davis, Fairfax, Va., and T. Brooke Howard, Alexandria, Va., for appellant.

George P. Williams, Asst. U.S. Atty., E. D. Va. (Brian P. Gettings, U.S. Atty., on brief), for appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court.
Before BUTZNER, RUSSELL and FIELD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
[1] Walter Robert Dickson appeals his conviction for the interstate transportation of a falsely made and forged security in violation of18 U.S.C. § 2314. Finding no error we affirm.

[2] The definition of a security in18 U.S.C. § 2311includes a document "transferring or assigning any right, title, or interest in or to goods, wares, and merchandise . . ." On consideration of the briefs, record, and argument, we conclude that the district court properly ruled that this definition of a security embraced a "statement of source of title" of a motor vehicle and that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the judgment.

[3] Affirmed.Page 316