United States v. Harry U. Scruggs, Sr., and Harry U. Scruggs, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “that the offense of possession of stolen goods is distinct from the offense of receiving stolen goods” because the “statute defines these offenses in the disjunctive and, therefore, clearly reflects the congressional intent that there were to be distinct crimes”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).