TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. James Ray Jones

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. James Ray JONES, Appellant

United States v. Jones, 421 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
January 30, 1970
Docket
No. 13862
Judges
Haynsworth, Bóreman, Craven
Citations
421 F.2d 8411970 U.S. App. LEXIS 10949

Opinion — Per Curiam

*842 PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 2314 for knowingly transporting across interstate boundaries stolen R. T. French food products of a value in excess of $5,000. The only significant issue raised on this appeal is whether the jurisdictional amount was established. Value is defined by 18 U.S.C. § 2311 as “market value.”

LI, 2] The goods were stolen while being delivered by French to its customers. The only evidence of market value introduced was the invoices for the stolen goods which showed a price of $5,071.10. This was the price agreed upon by the buyers and seller of these goods and as such is competent evidence of market value. United States v. Pal-umbo, 2 Cir., 317 F.2d 607 , cited with approval in United States v. Tippett, 4 Cir., 353 F.2d 335 , 338 n. 2. The invoice also showed a two per cent discount which was offered French’s distributors as a bonus for payment within ten days. This discount, available only if earned by the distributor, like an interest or penalty charge for late payment, does not alter the value of the goods themselves.

Accordingly, the judgment below is Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1981: 11986: 119812026peak 1981 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Charles Armen Calabrese, Samuel Ray Calabrese, Charles R. Knowles645 F.2d 1379 (10th Cir. 1981)
  2. United States v. James Howard Wentz800 F.2d 1325 (4th Cir. 1986)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Ernest Tippett, United States of Am. v. Charles Ellis Willis, 353 F.2d 335 (4th Cir. 1966) 17

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list