State v. Bair

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that either receiving or retaining stolen property of different individuals is a single act which must be prosecuted as a single offense where the evidence established that the retention or possession of the stolen property was simultaneous
• holding that either receiving or retaining stolen property of different individuals is a single act which must be prosecuted as a single offense where the evidence established that the retention or possession of the stolen property was simultaneous
• \`[R]etaining' the stolen property of different individuals is but a single act and must be prosecuted as only one offense if the evidence shows ... that the retention or possession of such stolen property was simultaneous.\
• “ ‘[Retaining’ the stolen property of different individuals is but a single act and must be prosecuted as only one offense if the evidence shows . . . that the retention or possession of such stolen property was simultaneous.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. McReynolds
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2003-06-10· cited 34×
• McInturff v. State
  Wyoming Supreme Court· 1991-03-15· cited 27×
• State v. Porter
  Utah Supreme Court· 1985-08-29· cited 23×
• State v. Tarafa
  Utah Supreme Court· 1986-06-17· cited 23×
• Horsey v. State
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1988-03-28· cited 17×
• Beaty v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2006-11-21· cited 13×
• Gilmore v. State
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1986-04-01· cited 9×
• Green v. State
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1986-11-17· cited 6×
• Saucerman v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1990-07-02· cited 5×
• State v. Sisneros
  Utah Supreme Court· 2022-02-10· cited 3×
• Antrobus v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1995-08-02