## Facts

- Herbert Williams, a Virgin Islands civil defense employee, had access to a government storeroom containing rolls of chicken wire.
- Williams secretly entered the office at night, obtained storeroom keys, removed chicken wire, and sold it for personal gain.
- Charles Leonard assisted Williams at times in selling the stolen chicken wire.
- Williams set fire to the storeroom, allegedly to conceal the thefts.
- Williams was charged with arson, grand larceny, and embezzlement; Leonard was charged as an aider and abettor on the grand larceny and embezzlement counts.
- The jury convicted Williams of arson and embezzlement and convicted Leonard of aiding and abetting embezzlement; the jury returned no verdict on the grand larceny count.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence supported embezzlement under Virgin Islands law where an employee with access to a storeroom secretly removed employer property not specifically entrusted to him.
2. Whether a defendant may be convicted of aiding and abetting embezzlement when the proof shows, at most, larceny and the jury returned no verdict on a separate larceny charge.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit reversed Leonard’s conviction for aiding and abetting embezzlement.
- The court held that the proof established a trespassory taking (larceny), not embezzlement, because the chicken wire was not entrusted to Williams in a manner conferring lawful possession.
- Because the charged substantive offense (embezzlement) was not established on these facts, Leonard’s aider-and-abettor conviction for embezzlement could not stand.

## Legal Principles

- Embezzlement requires lawful possession of property obtained by virtue of a position of trust and subsequent fraudulent conversion of property entrusted to the defendant.
- Larceny applies when the defendant has only custody or access and wrongfully takes property from the owner’s possession through a trespassory taking.
- Mere access to premises or keys, without entrusted dominion over the specific property, does not satisfy the “entrustment” element required for embezzlement.
- Accomplice liability for aiding and abetting requires proof of the specific substantive offense charged; an aider-and-abettor conviction cannot be sustained where the evidence does not establish that offense.

## Conclusion

The court set aside Leonard’s embezzlement-based aider-and-abettor conviction because the employee’s secret removal of government property, taken without entrusted possession, constituted larceny rather than embezzlement under Virgin Islands law.


Government of the Virgin Islands v. Leonard, 548 F.2d 478 (3d Cir. 1977)