Katz

After a trial by jury defendant Katz was convicted of receiving stolen property. He appeals from the judgment of conviction.

Facts:

Appellant Katz was convicted of receiving property stolen from Aaron Piliavin. Testimony revealed that Mr. and Mrs. Piliavin closed their store at about 6 p.m. on Saturday, July 7. When they returned on Monday, July 9, much of their stock (mostly jeweliy and oriental art objects) was missing. Someone had broken in from the adjacent shop and had emptied the safe and some of the shelves. Mr. Piliavin testified that the total cost to him of the missing objects had been $9,168.14; that the replacement cost would be $35,839.52; and that the retail value of the goods was $67,542.

The stolen goods were sold by appellant to Jerome Furman, who in turn sold them to various dealers. The basic question at trial was whether appellant knew the goods were stolen, for knowledge of the nature of the property is an element of the offense charged. (People v. Vann, 12 Cal.3d 220, 224 [ 115 Cal.Rptr. 352 , 524 P.2d 824 ].) A related question is what standard to apply to determine whether he had knowledge.

Jerome Furman, who was given immunity from…