Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

COMMONWEALTH v. HOUMIS (06/14/73)

decided: June 14, 1973.

COMMONWEALTH
v.
HOUMIS, APPELLANT



Appeal from judgment of sentence of Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, of Allegheny County, Oct. T., 1970, No. 7547, and Nov. T., 1970, No. 7944, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Mark Houmis.

COUNSEL

Martin M. Sheinman, for appellant.

Robert L. Eberhardt, Assistant District Attorney, with him Robert W. Duggan, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Spaeth, JJ. Opinion by Watkins, J.

Author: Watkins

[ 227 Pa. Super. Page 574]

This is an appeal from the judgment of sentence of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Criminal Division, by the defendant, Mark Houmis, after being convicted in a non-jury trial of receiving stolen goods, said goods being a check and a credit card; and from the denial of post-trial motions by the court en banc.

[ 227 Pa. Super. Page 575]

He had been indicted for larceny of the check and the credit card and the appellant's demurrer of the larceny charges were sustained, but denied as to receiving stolen goods. After conviction, he was sentenced to not less than eight months nor more than sixteen months.

In order to sustain a conviction for receiving stolen goods, it must be shown that (1) the goods were stolen; (2) that defendant received some or all of such goods; (3) that he received them knowing or having reasonable cause to know that they were stolen. Commonwealth v. Lewis, 190 Pa. Superior Ct. 591, 155 A.2d 410 (1959). The appellant contends that the demurrer to the counts of receiving stolen goods should have been granted because there was not sufficient evidence from which it could be determined that the goods were stolen.

As to the credit card, there was evidence indicating that a Harbaugh Miller had requested that the Gulf Oil Company send him a credit card. There was evidence that he never received such card and that his mail box had been tampered with and forced open a few weeks after his request for the card. A service station attendant testified that a person later identified as the appellant had purchased gasoline at his station with a Gulf Oil Company credit card which bore the name of Harbaugh Miller. The attendant also testified that the appellant signed the name of Harbaugh Miller on the purchase slip.

Harbaugh Miller testified that he began receiving bills from Gulf Oil Company for purchases he never made and the signatures on the sales slips sent to him were not his signatures, but forgeries. Additional testimony was heard with regard to the numbers "928" appearing on the sales slips in the space for the license number of the car making the purchase and the final three numbers of the license plate of the car that the

[ 227 Pa. Super. Page 576]

    appellant was using at the time of the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.