Stone v. United States

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1967 · Evidence

385 F.2d 713 (10th Cir. 1967)

Updated August 22, 2026

EvidenceDyer Act18 U.S.C. § 2312stolen vehiclelawful possession later convertedfraudulent takingjury instructionssearch incident to arrest

Facts

The car's owner placed the car for sale through a dealer, and the defendant, a gas station attendant who knew it was for sale, obtained permission to take it to seek financing. He later left his job, did not return the car, and the owner reported it stolen; although he claimed an oral agreement to buy the car, no title papers were signed, title was not delivered, and no payment was made. About nine months later officers in New Mexico stopped and arrested him for misuse of an expired gasoline credit card while he was in the car. During the stop officers observed Louisiana plates, noted the radio was missing, recorded the serial number from the left door, and the defendant made volunteered statements claiming the car was his and had been given to him by his ex-wife in Indianapolis.

Issue

Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury on when a vehicle is "stolen" under 18 U.S.C. § 2312 in light of the defendant's claim that the car had been sold to him, and whether the automobile identification number and related statements were admitted in violation of the Fourth or Fifth Amendments. The court also considered whether allowing a witness to describe the car as "stolen" was improper opinion testimony.

Rule

Under 18 U.S.C. § 2312, a vehicle is "stolen" if it is feloniously taken with intent to deprive the owner of the rights and benefits of ownership, including where possession was initially obtained lawfully and the defendant later formed the criminal intent to convert it to his own use. If the vehicle was obtained by trick or device in a claimed sale situation, the requisite intent must exist when possession is obtained; jury instructions are sufficient if, read as a whole, they make that distinction and require acquittal if the defendant believed himself in rightful possession. Recording an automobile's identification number contemporaneously with a lawful arrest is a reasonable seizure when officers could reasonably believe the identification would aid in identifying the culprit, and volunteered statements are not barred by Miranda.

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Tulsa, Nina Flores let her neighbor, Devin Cole, take her pickup for the weekend so he could move furniture. On Sunday night, Devin decided to keep the truck, switched his phone off, and drove it into Kansas the next morning.

If Devin is prosecuted for transporting a stolen vehicle in interstate commerce, which is the strongest analysis?

Explanation. Under the majority rule, a vehicle is "stolen" for § 2312 purposes when possession is initially lawful but the defendant later forms the criminal intent to deprive the owner of the rights and benefits of ownership and converts the vehicle to his own use. No separate requirement exists that the initial possession be unlawful, that the owner first demand return, or that plates be altered.