Is Larcenous Intent an Element of Robbery?
September 12th, 2016
For decades CALJIC 9.40 has relied on the literal language of PC 211 to define the specific intent required for robbery as an intent to permanently deprive the possessor of the property that is taken. However, this definition is erroneous because robbery requires an intent to steal which is defined as an intent to permanently […]
Tags: CALCRIM Revisions, CC 1600, CC 625, Claim of Right, Defense Theory: Mens Rea/Intent, Homicide, Intoxication, Mens Rea: Intent, Robbery
No Sua Sponte Duty To Instruct On Defense Theory That Negates An Element Of The Offense; IAC For Failure To Request Defense Theory Instruction
February 9th, 2015
People v. Hussain (2014) 231 Cal. App. 4th 261, 269-72, extended the holding of People v. Anderson (2011) 51 Cal.4th 989, 998 [trial courts do not have a duty to instruct sua sponte on the defense of accident] to a situation where the defendant relied claim of right to negate the felonious intent to […]
Tags: CC 1600, CC 1800, CC 1863, Claim of Right, Defense Theory Instructions, Duty to Instruct, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (IAC), Judge Duty to Instruct, Robbery, Sua Sponte, Theft
Claim of Right: Lack of Concealment
December 20th, 2014
Caveat: Intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property taken is an essential element of larceny. (See CC 1600.) Accordingly, the jury cannot convict, if in light of all the evidence, including the defendant’s alleged claim of right, the intent to permanently deprive element has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. […]
Tags: CC 863, Claim of Right, Defense Theory Instructions