Crim Law Chapter 3: Property Offenses

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 0 people
GameKnowt Play
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
Card Sorting

1/48

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced

No study sessions yet.

49 Terms

1
New cards

What are the five major theft crimes?

(1) Larceny, (2) Robbery, (3) Embezzlement, (4) False Pretenses, (5) Extortion.

2
New cards

What is the common law definition of larceny?

The trespassory taking and carrying away of the personal property of another with intent to permanently deprive.

3
New cards

What are the four elements of larceny?

(1) Trespassory taking, (2) Carrying away, (3) Personal property of another, (4) Intent to permanently deprive.

4
New cards

What is a trespassory taking?

Taking possession of property without the owner’s consent.

5
New cards

What is “larceny by trick”?

Obtaining possession by fraud or misrepresentation—still a trespassory taking

6
New cards

What does “taking and carrying away” (asportation) require?

Possession or control for any moment and any movement of the property, however slight.

7
New cards

What types of property are excluded from larceny?

Real estate, services, labor, and intangibles like sneaking into a movie.

8
New cards

How can someone commit larceny against their own property?

If another person has lawful possession of it, and they wrongfully take it back.

9
New cards

What is the key difference between larceny and embezzlement?

Larceny = wrongful taking of possession; Embezzlement = misappropriation after lawful possession.

10
New cards

What is the mens rea for larceny?

Intent to permanently deprive the rightful possessor at the time of taking.

11
New cards

Does the intent to keep property for personal use matter?

No—any intent to permanently deprive (keep, sell, or destroy) is sufficient.

12
New cards

Is larceny intent measured subjectively or objectively?

Subjectively—based on the defendant’s actual state of mind.

13
New cards

What rule did the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court establish in Liebenow?

An honest but mistaken belief that property was abandoned negates intent for larceny, even if unreasonable.

14
New cards

What rule did Marsh establish about intent to return property?

A defendant lacks larceny intent only if he intends to return the property within a reasonable time and has a substantial ability to do so.

15
New cards

If someone takes property intending to return it only for a reward, are they guilty of larceny?

Yes, because the intent to return must be unconditional.

16
New cards

Davis takes a horse and carriage, later abandoning it 5 miles away. Does this show intent to permanently deprive?

Yes—abandoning property in a way that makes recovery unlikely supports intent to permanently deprive.

17
New cards

How is robbery defined?

Taking personal property of another, against their will, from their person or presence, by force or fear, with intent to permanently deprive.

18
New cards

Which elements of robbery mirror larceny?

Taking, personal property of another, and intent to permanently deprive.

19
New cards

What two elements distinguish robbery from larceny?

(1) Use of force or fear, and (2) taking from the victim’s person or immediate presence.

20
New cards

Can robbery be committed by fear alone?

Yes—an express threat or implied threat (like brandishing a weapon) is enough.

21
New cards

What is the rule from Lear v. State

Robbery requires taking property from another’s person or immediate presence by force sufficient to overcome resistance or by instilling fear. Mere snatching is not robbery.

22
New cards

What level of force is required for robbery?

Enough force to overcome resistance; minimal force (like a struggle) may suffice.

23
New cards

What does “from the person or immediate presence” mean in robbery?

Property must be taken directly from the victim or within their immediate reach/control.

24
New cards

25
New cards

What does embezzlement cover?

Misappropriation of property lawfully entrusted to someone.

26
New cards

What does false pretenses cover?

Obtaining title to property by fraud or misrepresentation.

27
New cards

What is the definition of embezzlement?

Fraudulent conversion of another’s property by someone already in lawful possession of it.

28
New cards

How does embezzlement differ from larceny?

  • Larceny → trespassory taking without consent.

  • Embezzlement → lawful possession first, then misappropriation.

29
New cards

What is the difference between custody and possession in theft crimes?

  • Custody only → misappropriation = larceny.

  • Possession → misappropriation = embezzlement.

30
New cards

Does embezzlement require personal gain? (State v. Lough)

No. Conversion occurs whenever someone treats entrusted property as their own, even if discarded or destroyed without benefit.

31
New cards

When is the crime of embezzlement complete? (State v. Lough)

As soon as the conversion occurs; later returning the property does not undo the crime.

32
New cards

What is the definition of false pretenses?

Obtaining title to property through false representation of material fact, with intent to defraud.

33
New cards

What is the difference between larceny by trick and false pretenses?

  • Larceny by trick → fraudulently obtains possession only.

  • False pretenses → fraudulently obtains title (ownership) + possession.

34
New cards

What is the rule from People v. Phebus?

If both possession and title are obtained by fraud, the crime is false pretenses.

35
New cards

What are the key distinctions among theft crimes?

  • Larceny → trespassory taking.

  • Embezzlement → entrusted possession, later misappropriated.

  • Larceny by Trick → fraud induces possession only.

  • False Pretenses → fraud induces transfer of title + possession.

36
New cards

What is the definition of extortion?

Obtaining property from another with consent induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, fear, or under color of official right

37
New cards

What are the three categories of extortion?

(1) Threats of violence, (2) Wrongful non-violent threats (blackmail), (3) Public officials under color of official right.

38
New cards

How does extortion differ from robbery?

Robbery = property taken against will, immediate harm, no choice.
Extortion = property given with consent, but induced by wrongful threat (usually future harm).

39
New cards

What was the rule from United States v. Zhou (2d Cir.)?

Extortion requires obtaining property with consent induced by a wrongful threat; robbery is property taken against the will of the victim.

40
New cards

What is blackmail?

Extortion through wrongful non-violent threats, usually threatening to reveal embarrassing or damaging information unless paid.

41
New cards

What test helps determine if a threat is wrongful in blackmail cases?

The nexus test: If the threat relates to a valid claim of right, it is not wrongful.

42
New cards

What is extortion “under color of official right”?

When a public official seeks or receives a payment not due for the performance of their duties (essentially soliciting/accepting a bribe).

43
New cards

What is the common law definition of burglary?

Breaking and entering the dwelling of another at night with intent to commit a felony therein.

44
New cards

What constitutes a breaking under common law burglary?

Any use of force, even slight (e.g., opening a closed but unlocked door).

45
New cards

What is constructive breaking?

Entry obtained through fraud or threats (e.g., tricking someone into opening the door).

46
New cards

What satisfies the entry element of burglary?

Penetration of the dwelling by any part of the body.

47
New cards

What counted as a dwelling at common law?

Any place regularly used for sleeping, but now uses any structure.

48
New cards

What intent was required at common law?

Intent to commit a felony inside, formed at the time of entry, but now expanded to any crime

49
New cards

What rule did the court establish about “remains” in re T.J.?

It means unlawfully remaining, not lawful presence—shoplifting is not burglary.