Scobee v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding conviction for grand theft auto and rejecting defense that defendant did not know car was stolen where patrolling officer observed defendant’s recently stolen vehicle with headlights off, steering column damaged and keyless ignition
• stolen property discovered in vehicle being driven by defendant and other property later located in defendant's home
• “There are two similar, yet separate and distinct, inferences that can be made from proof of possession of recently stolen property: (1) an inference that the possessor stole the property ... and (2) an inference that the possessor knew or should have known the property was stolen.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).