State of North Carolina v. Robertson (2000): Larceny or Robbery?

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

OPTION A: State of North Carolina v. Robertson (2000): Larceny or Robbery?
a. Read the court case State of North Carolina v. Willie Herbert Robertson, 531 S.E. 2d 490 (2000). (This link opens in a separate browser window)
b. Review the following North Carolina statutes in the Instructor Powerpoint and in the NCGS:
• Common Law Robbery (NCGS 14-87), Assault with a Deadly Weapon with Intent to Kill Inflicting Serious Injury (NCGS 14-32(b)), Felonious Larceny (from the person) (NCGS 14-72(b)(1)).
c. Answer the following questions in one essay containing 150+ words (content):
• What crimes was Robertson initially charged with and why?
• Based on the facts of the case, do you feel that the court ruled correctly in not allowing an imperfect defense of Voluntary Intoxication for either of the two original charges? Why or why not?
• Based on what you have read, do you feel that the level of force was enough to qualify for the charge of Common Law Robbery? Or did the court rule correctly in choosing the lesser charge on appeal? Explain your reasoning based on the elements for these crimes.
• What would have had to occur in this scenario in order for you to change your mind and choose the other charge? Explain.
OPTION B: Larceny of a Motor Vehicle in North Carolina.
a. Read the UNC School of Government blog post North Carolina Criminal Law: Larceny of a Motor Vehicle. (This link opens in a separate browser window)
b. Review the North Carolina statute on Larceny (NCGS 14-72) and any other relevant statute discussed in the post.
c. Answer the following questions in one essay containing 300+ words (content):
• In your opinion, should there be a specific statute for Motor Vehicle Theft in North Carolina? Why or why not?
• If such a statute was created, what would it look like? In other words, what elements would, or should be included in such a statute?
• Should the penalties be different for motor vehicles than for other types of stolen merchandise or items? Explain.
• Do you feel that North Carolina should have a specific statute for carjacking? Or should this crime be charged as it is currently under the Armed Robbery or Common Law Robbery statutes? Discuss your answer.

Sample Solution

State of North Carolina v. Robertson (2000): Defendant was tried at the 19 January 1999 session of Mecklenburg County Superior Court on one count of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. 14-32(a), and one count of common law robbery. At trial, the State`s evidence tended to show that defendant and the victim, Ms. Dover, had in the past been involved in a relationship. The evidence at trial also tended to show that defendant had been drinking heavily prior to this incident, and the issue of defendant`s capacity to form an intent due to intoxication was submitted to the jury. The jury returned a verdict of guilty as to both the assault and robbery charges.

efore any inspecting or information assortment, a pilot search to find a scope of pony chestnut trees under various fake light powers was executed. No thought was given to some other factors like size or age. 30 trees were settled on. The trees were all in Bristol, Joined Realm and ran in area from Durdham Downs down into Clifton Town. The distance between the farthest trees was 1.7 miles. Each tree was given a number and its area was recorded utilizing Google MapsTM. The trees chose were across a scope of night light, from totally dim by road lighting to being encircled by road lighting.

2.2 Handout Assortment

To precisely report which trees the leaves were from, they were gathered prior to gathering the light information. Over a time of seven days, visits to the 30 foreordained trees were made. A pony chestnut tree leaf comprises of five to seven flyers. To keep up with consistency, the focal flyer was taken from each leaf and cut at the foundation of the handout utilizing scissors. It was this handout that was saved for later investigation. At each tree, ten pamphlets were gathered. To choose which pamphlets to take, it was resolved which flyer was least on the outside of the tree. The nine excess handouts were then gathered from around the underlying pamphlet inside a 30cm width. When the pamphlets from one tree had been gathered, they were placed into a sack which was named with the tree number. A photo was then taken remaining under the tree at the point the leaves were gathered from, holding the numbered pack.

The leaves were taken into the lab around the same time they were gathered and captured utilizing a Standard EOS M3 camera (Ordinance, Joined Realm). This was to keep the leaf in the manner it was found in the event that any excavators that were as yet alive kept on eating the leaf whenever it had been taken out from the tree. They were captured by mounting the camera on a stand and keeping the camera settings predictable so the photos would be all of a similar quality when it came to the examination. The flyers were put on a white foundation with the tree number sticker close to it so they could be ordered accurately once the photos were all taken. There was likewise a 30cm ruler in shot to permit a scale bar to be utilized when it came to examining the pamphlets.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer