Case Name: Eddie M. SCARBOROUGH, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee
Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Decision Date: 1985-08-07
Citations: 496 A.2d 277
Docket Number: No. 84-754
Parties: Eddie M. SCARBOROUGH, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee.
Judges: Before NEBEKER, NEWMAN and FER-REN, Associate Judges,
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 496
Pages: 277–285

Head Matter:
Eddie M. SCARBOROUGH, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee.
No. 84-754.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Submitted May 9, 1985.
Decided Aug. 7, 1985.
Geoffrey D. Allen, Washington, D.C., for appellant.
Joseph E. diGenova, U.S. Atty., and Michael W. Farrell, Judith Hetherton, Leonard E. Birdsong, and Gerald W. Heller, Asst. U.S. Attys., Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before NEBEKER, NEWMAN and FER-REN, Associate Judges,

Opinion:
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.