Receiving/Conspiring to Receive Stolen Property
The law regarding receiving or conspiring to receive stolen property says that if the receiver of the property knows it is stolen, or by reasonable standards should have known the property is stolen, he or she is guilty. If the receiver is innocent and does not know nor should not have any reason to know the property is stolen, he or she is not guilty. In this case, the stolen goods are usually returned to the owner.
The purpose of the law is to discourage people from knowingly receiving or buying stolen property for one of the following purposes:
- Keeping it yourself
- Intending to sell it
- Intending to give it to someone else
Punishment for the crime may be a misdemeanor, a felony or probation.
The prosecution must find the following circumstances to be true for the accused to be convicted of the crime of receiving stolen property:
- The property was actually stolen
- You were aware of or should have been aware of the fact that the property was stolen
- You meant to “deprive the owner of his or her property, such as by keeping it, selling it, or giving it away to another” person
David M. Dudley, a criminal defense attorney who is licensed to practice both federal and state law, is experienced in defending people who are accused of receiving stolen property. He might use a number of defenses to show that you are not guilty. These may include:
- Showing that the property was not in fact stolen
- Showing that you intended to return the property either to the owner or to the police
- Showing that you didn’t know the property was stolen
If you are accused of the crime of receiving stolen property, you should call Mr. Dudley immediately. He is a successful criminal defense lawyer who has helped many people in your situation. He has an almost unparalleled degree of experience as a federal crimes lawyer and doesn’t rest until he gets the best outcome for his clients.
Selected Case Results
- P. v. C.H.: The defendant managed a post-market automotive supply store for a famous NBA basketball player. Executing a search warrant at the store, state and local authorities found a substantial amount of stolen automotive and computer equipment. Charged with numerous felony counts of receiving, and conspiring to receive, stolen property, the defendant faced over 20 years in prison because of a robbery and kidnapping conviction he had sustained many years earlier. Attorney Dudley was able to negotiate a settlement which resulted in his client receiving PROBATION with electronic monitoring and, after the probationary term was completed, a DISMISSAL of the case.
- P. v. F.I.: The defendant, a day trader of stocks and bonds, purchased a considerable amount of computer equipment from a retail store, equipment which turned out to be stolen. After he was charged with felony possession of stolen property, the defense worked out a misdemeanor disposition for PROBATION which prevented him from going to jail and permitted him to remain in the country even though he was not a citizen.
- U.S. v. J.C.: Federal authorities indicted the defendant in two separate districts for conspiring to distribute over $1,000,000 in counterfeit software. The defense later negotiated a plea agreement which consolidated the two cases in one district and allowed for a sentence of PROBATION.
- S. v. H.S.: The defendant, who owned a computer business, was arrested with his alleged co-conspirators in possession of over $400,000 in cash at the culmination of a reverse sting operation during which undercover officers offered to sell them counterfeit Intel computer chips. Before trial, the court granted a defense motion to DISMISS the indictment, which included numerous serious felony charges.
- P. v. M.W.: While in the process of obtaining her United States citizenship, the defendant was arrested in possession of a substantial amount of counterfeit Microsoft software less than two years after Attorney Dudley had persuaded a court in another state to DISMISS a similar case against her. The district attorney in the new matter filed several serious felony counts against the defendant and subsequently refused to consider any settlement not involving a felony plea. Conducting his own research, Attorney Dudley was able to find an obscure statute, apparently not used by prosecutors in years, the violation of which represented a felony, but not a felony involving moral turpitude which would have prevented her successful naturalization. After the district attorney agreed to let the defendant plead no contest to that statute as a resolution of the case, the defendant received a sentence of PROBATION with no jail time (even though Microsoft attorneys had asked the judge to incarcerate her) and then obtained her American citizenship. After she completed her term of probation, the defense persuaded the judge to DISMISS the case.
- U.S. v. J.T.: The defendant owned an international trading company which allegedly smuggled millions of dollars in illegal products into the United States from China and faced federal smuggling charges. The defense negotiated a settlement of the case which allowed the defendant to serve only six months in a prison camp.
- U.S. v. K.R.: A Jamaican citizen, the defendant faced a federal indictment for conspiring to purchase a falsified American passport. Although the defendant was wanted for numerous crimes in Jamaica and Great Britain, including multiple homicides, the defense was able to negotiate a deal which resulted in him receiving a sentence of eight months.
- U.S. v. S.W.: Federal customs authorities arrested the defendant as the recipient of over $3,000,000 in counterfeit Marlboro cigarettes shipped in a container from China. After negotiating a plea to one count of a multi-count federal indictment, the defense persuaded the court to sentence the defendant below the applicable sentencing guideline range. Ultimately, the Mr. Dudley’s client served only eleven months for the offense.