From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hardeman v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
May 26, 1947
163 F.2d 21 (D.C. Cir. 1947)

Opinion

No. 9289.

Submitted April 7, 1947.

Decided May 26, 1947.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia.

Conrad V. Hardeman was convicted of larceny and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Mr. Curtis P. Mitchell, of Washington, D.C., submitted on the brief for appellant.

Mr. John D. Lane, Asst. U.S. Atty., of Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. George Morris Fay, U.S. Atty., Arthur J. McLaughlin, Asst. U.S. Atty., and Sidney S. Sachs, Asst. U.S. Atty., all of Washington, D.C., were on the brief, submitted on the brief for appellee.

Mr. Edward M. Curran, U.S. Atty., of Washington, D.C., at the time the record was filed, also entered an appearance for appellee.

Before GRONER, Chief Justice, and EDGERTON and PRETTYMAN, Associate Justices.


Appellant was convicted of larceny on evidence that was entirely circumstantial. On this appeal we are asked to reverse on the ground that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict of the jury. But the rule in such cases is that we may not weigh the evidence or determine the credibility of the witnesses. It is enough if there is substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury. Glasser v. United States, 1942, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680.

Here the crime was larceny, and while it is true that the evidence is entirely circumstantial, there is undisputed testimony that the crime was committed, that appellant was in the apartment room of the victim while he slept and at the time of the loss; that appellant was badly in need of money before the larceny and was in possession of a considerable sum immediately thereafter. It is also true that his explanation of the means whereby he got this money is most unconvincing.

The jury heard the witnesses testify and reached the conclusion that appellant was the thief, and in the circumstances it was for them and not for us to decide that question.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Hardeman v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
May 26, 1947
163 F.2d 21 (D.C. Cir. 1947)
Case details for

Hardeman v. United States

Case Details

Full title:HARDEMAN v. UNITED STATES

Court:United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Date published: May 26, 1947

Citations

163 F.2d 21 (D.C. Cir. 1947)
82 U.S. App. D.C. 194

Citing Cases

Ziegler v. District of Columbia

It is true that there was no direct testimony that appellant failed to give his full time and attention to…

Thomas v. District of Columbia

On the basis of the foregoing recital we find no merit to appellant's contention that the evidence was…