Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

 Larceny  Embezzlement  False pretenses  Receiving stolen property  Forgery & uttering  Robbery  Extortion.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: " Larceny  Embezzlement  False pretenses  Receiving stolen property  Forgery & uttering  Robbery  Extortion."— Presentation transcript:

1

2  Larceny  Embezzlement  False pretenses  Receiving stolen property  Forgery & uttering  Robbery  Extortion

3  The trespassory taking & carrying away the personal property of another with the intent to permanently deprive that individual of the possession of the property.

4  Trespassory  Taking  And carrying away of the  Personal property of another with  Intent to permanently deprive that individual of  Possession of the property

5  Trespassory taking refers to a wrongdoer who removes goods or money from the possession of another without concern.  Possession means physical control over property with the ability to freely use & enjoy the property.  Custody is the temporary & limited right to control property.  Larceny is not limited to business & commerce.  Do not confuse ownership with possession.

6  Must be a taking (caption) & movement (asportation) of the property.  A taking requires asserting “dominion & control” over the property.  The property must then be moved (however much).  Larceny may be accomplished through an innocent person.  Every portion of the property must be moved.  Various statutes have followed the MPC & abandoned the requirement of asportation; person is guilty of theft if he/she “unlawfully takes, or exercises unlawful control” over property.

7  Concerned with the taking of property from an individual who has a superior right to possess the object.  At common law—only tangible property  Under modern statutes all varieties of property are subject to larceny; these statutes have expanded larceny to cover every conceivable variety of property.

8  The mens rea requirement of larceny is the intent to permanently deprive another of the property.  There must be concurrence between the intent & the act.  Abandoned property is not subject to larceny (it has no owner).

9  Common law distinguished between grand larceny & petit larceny.  Grand larceny: stealing of goods worth more than 12 pence; death penalty applied.  State statutes also distinguish between categories of larceny but do so by specifying a dollar amount. Property more than the certain amount is grand larceny (felony), less than that amount is petit larceny (misdemeanor).  Value of the property is not the only basis for distinguishing between grand & petit larceny; also based on theft of particular items, theft from a home, theft from the “person of another.”

10  The law of embezzlement has slowly evolved & there is no uniform definition.  The core of embezzlement is the unlawful conversion of the property of another by an individual in the possession of the property.  Central elements include: fraudulent conversion of the property of another who is in unlawful possession of the property.  Today, embezzlement is a misdemeanor or felony based on the value of the property.  State v. Robinson (2004)

11  The obtaining of possession of another through misrepresentation or deceit is called larceny by trick.  Statutes differ in defining false pretenses but the essence of the offense is that one is guilty of false pretenses who:  obtains title & possession of property of another by  a knowingly false representation of  a present or past material fact with  the intent to defraud that  causes an individual to pass title to his/her property.

12  The actus reus of this offense is a false representation of a fact.  The false representation must be of a past or present fact (not future—failure to fulfill a promise).  The misrepresentation must be material & must cause an individual to transfer title.  Silence does not constitute false pretenses.

13  Mens rea requires the false representation of an existing or past fact that is made “knowingly & designedly” with the “intent to defraud.”  “Recklessness” or representations without information are typically sufficient.

14  Requirement satisfied by knowledge that a representation is untrue; an uncertainty whether a representation is true or untrue; or an awareness that a defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to determine whether a representation is true or untrue.  While larceny requires a taking & carrying away of the property, false pretenses only requires a transfer of title & possession.  False pretenses also includes wider variety of property than larceny.  State v. Henry (2003)

15  Identity theft is the theft of your name & identifying information which can lead to economic damage (crime of the 21 st century).  Theft of intangible property such as credit card or SSN number may lead to great financial harm.  In 1998, Congress passed the Identity Theft & Assumption Deterrence Act creating the “new offense” of identity theft.  City of Liberal, Kansas v. Vargas (2001)

16  Primary property offenses committed in cyberspace:  Unauthorized computer access to programs & databases  Unlawfully obtaining personal information through trickery & deceit  State statutes punish a variety of computer-related activities.  But, does law enforcement possess the expertise & resources to track sophisticated cybercriminals?  State v. Schwartz (1999)

17  No offense under common law.  Offense developed in England & included in state criminal codes.  Receiving stolen property requires that an individual:  receive property,  knowing the property to be stolen,  with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property.

18  Requires that an individual control the stolen property, however briefly.  Individual may either take actual possession of the property or constructive possession (by arranging delivery to another person or specific location.  The property must actually be stolen.

19  Some statutes typically require actual knowledge that the goods are stolen; others provide it is sufficient an individual believes that the goods are stolen.  Courts: sufficient if a reasonable person would possess awareness of the property’s stolen nature.  Recipient of stolen property must also have the mens rea to permanently deprive the owner of possession & this must concur with the receipt of the property.  Hurston v. State (1991)  People v. Land (1994)

20  Forgery is creating a false legal document or the material modification of an existing legal instrument with the intent to deceive or defraud others—complete upon drafting the document.  Uttering is a separate & distinct offense that involves the actus reus of circulating or using a forged document.  Typically limited to documents of “legal significance;” MPC extends these offenses to all varieties of documents.

21  A false document or material modification of an existing document that is  written with the intent to defraud, and  if genuine, would have legal significance. Elements of Uttering:  Offering a  forged instrument that is  known to be false and is  presented as authentic  with the intent to defraud or deceive

22  Falsely making or materially altering an existing document.  Examples of “falsely making”:  Making a false id for a friend  Creating false passports  Fabricating tickets to concert/sporting event  An example of “materially altering” might involve stealing a check, signing the name of the owner of the account without authorization, & making it payable to yourself.

23  Forgery requires an intent to defraud, need not be directed at any specific individual.

24  Uttering is offering a document as genuine that is known to be false with the intent to deceive.  Distinct from the offense of forgery.  Simulation is a crime (in the MPC) that punishes the creation with the purpose to defraud of false objects (e.g., antiques, jewelry, paintings).  The offense of simulation requires proof of a purpose to defraud or proof that an individual knows that he/she is “facilitating a fraud.”  United States v. Cunningham (2004)

25  Typically described as aggravated larceny  Robbery is the trespassory taking & carrying away of the personal property of another with the intent to steal.  Distinguished from larceny by the additional elements that:  The personal property must be taken from a victim’s person or presence.  The taking of the personal property must be achieved by violence or the threat of violence.

26  The property must be taken from the person or presence of the victim.  The property must be taken by violence or intimidation.  Property may also be seized as a result of intimidation or the fear of the immediate infliction of violence.  A threat may be implied.

27  The assailant must possess the intent to permanently deprive an individual of the property.

28  The intent to steal & the application of force or intimidation must coincide (occur at the same time).  Violence or intimidation must be employed for the purpose of taking.  The Model Penal Code & some states allows for force or intimidation to occur “in the course of committing a theft” (during or fleeing from).

29  Today’s statutes distinguish between simple & aggravated robbery—based on degree of dangerousness of defendant’s acts, fear & apprehension of victim, not on property value.  Aggravating factors may include:  Robber armed with dangerous weapon  Robber used a dangerous instrument  Robber inflicted serious bodily injury  Robber carried out theft with accomplice  Messina v. State (1999)

30  Newly recognized form of property crime  Typically defined as a form of robbery & punishes the taking of a motor vehicle “in the possession of another, from his/her person or immediate presence…against his/her will.”  Must be accomplished by force or fear  No requirement to permanently steal the car  Trend is to find defendants guilty when a car is seized & not to require movement of the car  People v. Montero (1996)

31  Common law extortion punished the unlawful collection of money by a government official as a misdemeanor.  Statutes expanded this offense & elements include:  The taking of property from another by  a present threat of future violence or threat to circulate secret, embarrassing, or harmful information or threat of criminal charges or threat to take or withhold official government action or threat to inflict economic harm & other harms listed in the state statute, with  a specific intent to deprive a lawful possessor of money or property.

32  Entails a threat of future violence or other harms  The threat to disclose secret or embarrassing information is commonly referred to as blackmail.  Majority of states provide that extortion is complete when the threat is made; others require handing over of money, property, etc.  The object of extortion may be money, property, or “anything of value.”  Bribery, on the other hand, occurs when money or a valuable benefit is offered or provided to a public official in return for an official’s action or inaction.


Download ppt " Larceny  Embezzlement  False pretenses  Receiving stolen property  Forgery & uttering  Robbery  Extortion."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google