18 U.S.C. § 1707
Theft of property used by Postal Service
Whoever steals, purloins, or embezzles any property used by the Postal Service, or appropriates any such property to his own or any other than its proper use, or conveys away any such property to the hindrance or detriment of the public service, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; but if the value of such property does not exceed $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1949–2021 · leading case: United States v. Webber, 536 F.3d 584 (7th Cir. 2008).
United States v. Webber, 536 F.3d 584 (7th Cir. 2008). “2007) ( 18 U.S.C. § 1707 ); United States v. Parisien, 413 F.”
United States v. Algee, 599 F.3d 506 (6th Cir. 2010). “00 in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1707 , one count of misappropriation of postal funds in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Charles L. Starr, Jr., & Charles L. Starr, III, 816 F.2d 94 (2d Cir. 1987). “In exchange for his testimony, Douglas Whitaker pleaded guilty to one count of stealing a United States Postal Service date stamp in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1707 and also pleaded guilty to eleven counts of violating 18 U.”
United States v. Sargent, 504 F.3d 767 (9th Cir. 2007). “§ 641 and seven counts for theft of postal service property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1707 . After a bench trial, the district court entered a judgment of conviction on all eight counts and sentenced Sargent to a term of imprisonment of 30 months on six counts and 12 months on…”
Laymon Wesley Alsbury v. The United States Postal Serv., 530 F.2d 852 (9th Cir. 1976). “He was subsequently charged with theft of postal property, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1707 . Appellant was then suspended from employment, effective September 22, 1973, by the Officer-in-Charge of the Santa Barbara Post Office.”
United States v. Recognition Equip. Inc., 725 F. Supp. 587 (D.D.C. 1989). “§ 371 , one count of theft, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1707 and 2, one count of receiving stolen property, D.”
State v. Walls, 503 P.2d 1068 (Wash. 1972). “In short, the statute does not attempt to regulate a business or establish a class and legislate with respect to it. It merely defines different crimes and prescribes different punishments therefor.”
Melvin Joseph Conerly v. United States, 350 F.2d 679 (9th Cir. 1965). “§ 641 , but rather under 18 U.S.C. § 1707 , 6 which latter section, he asserts, preempted the field with respect to the criminal charge of stealing, possessing, etc.”
United States v. Daniel Reid & Theodore E. Thomas, Jr., 517 F.2d 953 (2d Cir. 1975). “§ 1706 , “property used by the Post Office Department,” 18 U.S.C. § 1707 , “postal funds,” 18 U.S.”
United States v. Cruz Santiago, 12 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1993). “1980) (discussing 18 U.S.C. § 1707 , referred to by the theft guideline, as a “joyriding” statute that requires no intent to deprive permanently); United States v.”
United States v. Derek Edward Benedict, 95 F.3d 17 (8th Cir. 1996). “§ 2115 (Count III), and aiding and abetting theft of post office property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1707 (Count XV). After a two-day trial, the jury began its deliberations late in the afternoon; forty-five minutes later the jury retired for the day.”
United States v. John Michael Deggs, 632 F.2d 829 (9th Cir. 1980). “CORDOVA, District Judge: This appeal is taken by John Michael Deggs who was indicted and convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 1707 of theft or appropria *830 tion of certain property used by the U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.