Full text
Eddie M. SCARBOROUGH v. UNITED STATES
Opinions in this case
- Majority — Per curiam
- Concurrence — Ferren
- Concurrence — Nebeker
- Concurrence — Newman
PER CURIAM: We affirm appellant’s conviction for receiving stolen property (felony), D.C.Code § 22-2205 (1981) — as we conclude we must, see M.A.P. v. Ryan, 285 A.2d 310 (D.C.1971) — on the basis of the second holding of Barkley v. United States, 455 A.2d 412, 415-16 (D.C.1983). However, because we find Barkley unpersuasive authority, and a majority of this division would reverse if free to do so, we express our views in the separate “concurring” opinions below.