OPINION OF THE COURT

The appellant Zambrano contends that the District Court erred in charging the jury that from Zambrano’s possession of recently stolen property the jury could infer that Zambrano knew the property had been stolen. 18 U.S.C. § 659. The stolen goods involved consisted of at least 1066 cases of Nestle chocolate which had been stolen within five days of Zambrano’s offer to sell them. Zambrano’s contention is without merit. See Rugendorf v. United States, 376 U.S. 528, 536, 84 S.Ct. 825, 11 L.Ed.2d 887 (1964), United States v. Allegrucci, 299 F.2d 811, 814 (3rd Cir. 1962). Other points asserted by the appellant do not require discussion. The judgment of conviction will be affirmed.