From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stewart v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Oct 10, 1963
324 F.2d 443 (D.C. Cir. 1963)

Summary

In Stewart we declined to reverse the trial court for its failure to instruct the jury on the charge of unlawful entry as a lesser included offense of housebreaking.

Summary of this case from United States v. Whitaker

Opinion

No. 17861.

Argued September 17, 1963.

Decided October 10, 1963.

Mr. David Booth Beers, Washington, D.C. (appointed by this court), for appellant.

Mr. Robert D. Devlin, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Messrs. David C. Acheson, U.S. Atty., and Frank Q. Nebeker and Harold H. Titus, Jr., Asst. U.S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before DANAHER, WRIGHT and McGOWAN, Circuit Judges.


Upon the appeal of a conviction for housebreaking and larceny, reversal is sought solely by reason of an alleged error of the trial judge in refusing, upon request, to charge that the jury might find appellant guilty of unlawful entry as a lesser offense necessarily included in that of housebreaking. Rule 31(c), Fed.R.Crim.P.

While in some circumstances, as here, the elements of unlawful entry (D.C. Code § 22-3102 (1961)) are comprehended within those of housebreaking (D.C. Code § 22-1801 (1961)), the latter requires also a finding of larcenous intent. Since the jury found the appellant guilty of larceny as well as housebreaking, it must have determined that larcenous intent was present in this case. Under these circumstances we need not pursue the issue of whether the failure to give the requested charge was error, since, even if it be so regarded, it was harmless in its impact upon the jury's disposition of the crimes charged in the indictment.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Stewart v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Oct 10, 1963
324 F.2d 443 (D.C. Cir. 1963)

In Stewart we declined to reverse the trial court for its failure to instruct the jury on the charge of unlawful entry as a lesser included offense of housebreaking.

Summary of this case from United States v. Whitaker

In Stewart v. United States, 116 U.S.App. D.C. 411, 324 F.2d 443 (1963), the court held that a failure to instruct on unlawful entry as a lesser included offense of housebreaking (now known as burglary) was harmless because the jury also found the defendant guilty of larceny.

Summary of this case from Nelson v. U.S.

In Stewart v. United States, 116 U.S.App.D.C. 411, 324 F.2d 443 (1963), unlawful entry was held to be included in the offense of housebreaking, D.C. Code 1967, § 22-1801, the precursor of the present § 22-1801 entitled "Burglary".

Summary of this case from Hebble v. United States
Case details for

Stewart v. United States

Case Details

Full title:Carroll W. STEWART, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee

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

Date published: Oct 10, 1963

Citations

324 F.2d 443 (D.C. Cir. 1963)
116 U.S. App. D.C. 411

Citing Cases

United States v. Whitaker

To prove burglary, the prosecution had only to establish the additional element of entry with the intent to…

United States v. Sinclair

See also United States v. Fox, 140 U.S.App.D.C. 129, 131 n. 19, 433 F.2d 1235, 1237 n. 19 (1970). And see…