Appellant was convicted of second degree burglary, 22 D.C.Code § 1801(b) (Supp. II 1969), and grand larceny, 22 D.C.Code § 2201 (1967). Although he raises several points on appeal, we deem it necessary to comment on only one.

Appellant challenges the trial court’s ruling permitting him to be impeached by prior convictions of unauthorized use of a vehicle and petit larceny on the ground that the former has no bearing on credibility and the latter was similar to the offense of grand larceny for which he was on trial.

We agree that under our opinion in United States v. Carr, 135 U.S.App.D.C. 348, 418 F.2d 1184 (1969), the offense of taking property without right, 22 D.C. Code § 1201 (1967), does not bear on credibility and that in essence unauthorized use of a vehicle is a similar offense. We agree, too, that Gordon v. United States, 127 U.S.App.D.C. 343, 383 F.2d 936 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1029, 88 S.Ct. 1421, 20 L.Ed.2d 287 (1968), precludes the use of the same or similar offenses for impeachment unless they “directly relat[e] to veracity.” 127 U.S.App.D.C. at 347, 383 F.2d at 940. The difficulty with appellant’s position as to both of his prior convictions is that they were introduced in evidence on his own direct examination in an effort to support his contention that he was framed in the instant case by one of the Government’s witnesses. Under the circumstances, he has no cause to complain.

Affirmed.