Peery v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that a reasonable factfinder “must have had a reasonable doubt” where Peery’s actions were “insolubly ambiguous” and where a person in Peery’s shoes who was not guilty of the charged offense “might have acted exactly as he did”
• finding the government’s evidence insufficient because “both innocent and guilty explanations for [the appellant’s] behavior may exist”
• for second-degree theft, government must prove that at time accused obtained property he “knew that he was without the authority to do so”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).