United States v. Rodney Ralph Calkins

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming jury instructions stating that “[a] person who knowingly possesses stolen goods has no right to demand compensation or a reward from the owner as a condition to returning the goods, and he may not withhold or conceal the goods until a reward is made available”
• “There is a distinction between hoping for or expecting a reward upon restoration of stolen property . . . and unlawfully withholding or failing to restore stolen property until a reward is paid or made available.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).