Chapter 11 – Property Crimes (Theft, Robbery, Arson, Burglary, Trespass)

Theft Crimes — General Framework

• Property crimes covered in Ch. 11 all involve either (1) taking property or (2) destroying it by fire (arson).
• Modern U.S. jurisdictions (incl. California) have largely merged historic common-law categories into consolidated theft statutes.
• Offense level:
  • Petty (misdemeanor) vs Grand (felony) theft hinges on fair-market value.
  • California cutoff: $950$ dollars.
  • Special items (e.g., automobiles) almost always trigger grand theft regardless of price → “grand theft auto.”
• Each theft-type offense nevertheless shares three core requirements:
  1. Tangible, movable property (must be capable of “asportation”—i.e., picked up & carried away).
  2. Value (trash you abandoned has none → no theft).
  3. Ownership/possessory interest (no owner = no theft).

Larceny (Traditional Theft)

• Definition: “The taking and carrying away of the personal property of another, without consent, and with intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession.”
• Elements broken down:
  • Taking & carrying away (“asportation”).
  • Personal property of another (cannot steal what is legally yours).
  • Without consent (any form of authorization destroys element).
  • Specific intent → actor must form intent at the moment of taking to permanently deprive.
  • Concurrence doctrine: mens rea + actus reus must coincide.
• Illustrative fact patterns:
  • Classroom pen prank ≠ theft (no intent to permanently deprive).
  • Solo “test-drive” around the block w/out salesperson: consent limited, but no intent to keep → not larceny.
  • Contractor hit by bus after taking $10{,}000$ deposit → civil breach of contract, not larceny (intent changed after initial consensual transfer).

Larceny by Trick vs. False Pretenses

• Historically separate; now merged in most statutes, but distinctions still bar-exam-testable.
  

• Not a common-law theft; added by statute.
• Definition: Unlawful conversion/misuse of property lawfully entrusted to defendant.
• Key points:
  • Property comes into D’s lawful possession via trust, employment, bailment, etc.
  • No requirement of intent to permanently deprive (most embezzlers initially plan to “pay it back”).
• Classic scenarios:
  • Target cashier skimming till.
  • Bookkeeper funding gambling habit with company funds.
  • Valet drives away or removes items from customers’ cars.

Receiving Stolen Property (RSP)

• Actus reus: Obtain possession, control, or title to stolen goods.
• Mens rea: Knowledge (or conscious awareness) at time of receipt that goods are stolen → specific-intent element.
• Pawn-shop problem:
  • Businesses avoid asking about provenance → plausible deniability.
  • Prosecutor must prove knowledge, often via circumstances (e.g., $400$ bike sold for $10$ in an alley at night).

Robbery

• “Larceny + force or fear.”
• Elements:
  1. Taking & carrying away personal property of another.
  2. From the person or immediate presence.
  3. By force or intimidation (fear).
• Variants:
  • Theft of unattended bike outside store = plain larceny.
  • Gun-point demand for the same bike = robbery.
  • Pick-pocket unnoticed → theft; punch-and-grab once discovered → robbery.
  • Some states treat force during escape as robbery; California repealed that extension.

Arson

• Common-law rule: “Malicious & willful burning of dwelling house of another (incl. curtilage).”
  • Curtilage = structures & land immediately surrounding home (garage, barn, outhouse).
  • Negligent fires ≠ arson (lack of malice).
• Modern statutes broaden scope:
  • Any structure, vehicle, forest land, grassland, mailbox, etc.
  • Can apply to one’s own property if intent is to defraud (e.g., insurance scam).
• California Penal Code §$451$ (simplified):
  • Willfully & maliciously sets fire/burns/causes to be burned any structure, forest land, or property.
  • Penalties escalate for inhabited structures, great bodily injury, etc.
  • Self-burning excluded unless done “to defraud.”
  • Proximate-cause principle: Arsonist liable for spread to neighbors’ property.

Burglary

• Common law: Breaking & entering dwelling at night with intent to commit a felony inside.
  • Daytime entry or entry into non-dwelling → not burglary at common law.
• Modern rule (e.g., Cal. PC §$459$):
  • Entering (no “breaking” needed) any building, structure, or locked vehicle, at any time, with intent to commit grand theft, petty theft, or any felony therein.
• Critical doctrinal points:
  • Entry itself = actus reus. Completion of intended crime unnecessary.
  • Consent defeats burglary unless intent to steal existed before entry.
  • Interior-door issue:
  • Some states treat unauthorized entry into room within a house as separate burglary.
  • California uses intent-at-entry test instead.
• Examples:
  • Bank visit with forged check → burglary the moment doors crossed.
  • Party guest who spontaneously steals artwork = theft only (intent arose after entry).
  • Party invite accepted solely to steal → burglary.

Criminal Trespass vs. Burglary

• Trespass = Unlawful entry without intent to commit theft/felony.
  • California residential trespass: PC §$602.5$ (misdemeanor).
  • Land/open-space variants: PC §$602(m)$, §$602.1$ (refusal to leave public business, etc.).
  • Public officers (police, fire, utilities) exempt while on duty.
• Example matrix:
  • Homeless person breaks into warehouse to sleep → trespass.
  • Same person breaks in intending to steal a heavy coat → burglary.

Key California Statutes Mentioned

• Theft consolidation: PC §§$484–488$ (petty) & §§$487$ (grand).
• Embezzlement folded into PC §$503$.
• RSP: PC §$496$.
• Robbery: PC §$211$.
• Arson: PC §$451$ (malicious) & §$452$ (reckless/negligent fires).
• Burglary: PC §$459$.
• Trespass: PC §§$602$ ff.; residential trespass §$602.5$.

Conceptual & Exam Connections

• Mens rea spectrum
  • Larceny & robbery: specific intent (permanent deprivation).
  • Embezzlement: intent to convert (may include temporary use).
  • Arson: general intent → “malicious” presumption from deliberate ignition.
• Concurrence vital in theft: later decision to keep ≠ larceny.
• Possession vs. title: bar exams love larceny-by-trick vs. false-pretenses distinctions.
• Actus reus timing for burglary: entry is enough; look for “dogs, alarms, security guard” fact patterns that cut short completion but still satisfy offense.
• Civil vs. Criminal liability: Breach of contract (shed example) illustrates separation between tort/contract remedies and criminal theft.
• Real-world relevance: Pawnshop compliance, insurance-fraud fire investigations, “beer-run” turned robbery when force used at door, etc.
• Ethical/Policy notes
  • Consolidation of statutes prevents wrongful acquittals due to hyper-technical pleading (double-jeopardy concern).
  • Embezzlement highlights employer-employee trust relationships.
  • Arson laws balance property rights with public-safety / wildfire concerns, especially in drought-prone states.