Harold Hitz Burton,
United States v. Turley — Opinion of the Court
“ If Congress desires to make cheating, in all its myriad varieties, a federal offense when employed to obtain an automobile that is then taken across a state line, it should express itself with less ambiguity than by language that leads three Courts of Appeals to decide that it has not said so and three that it has. ”
Harold Hitz Burton,
United States v. Turley — Opinion of the Court
“ A typical example of common-law larceny is the taking of an unattended automobile. But an automobile is no less 'stolen' because it is rented, transported interstate, and sold without the permission of the owner (embezzlement) . [16] The same is true where an automobile is purchased with a worthless check, transported interstate, and sold (false pretenses) . [17] Professional thieves resort to innumerable forms of theft and Congress presumably sought to meet the need for federal action effectively rather than to leave loopholes for wholesale evasion. ”
Harold Hitz Burton,
United States v. Turley — Opinion of the Court
“ By 1919, the law of most States against local theft had developed so as to include not only common-law larceny but embezzlement, false pretenses, larceny by trick, and other types of wrongful taking. The advent of the automobile, however, created a new problem with which the States found it difficult to deal. The automobile was uniquely suited to felonious taking whether by larceny, embezzlement or false pretenses. ”
