29 Sep Identify That Larceny
Larceny is defined as (aka the Rule Statement): The trespassory taking and carrying away of the personal property of another with intent to permanently deprive. Included in the larceny umbrella are: larceny by trick, false pretenses, and embezzlement. Often, the larceny crimes are the most dreaded of criminal law MCQ’s. There are a few tricks to being able to easily and quickly identify which larceny crime you are looking for or at!
The way to approach larceny crimes has two questions that must be asked first. 1.) Was the taking custody, possession, or title? 2.) When was the intent to permanently deprive formed?
What Kind Of Taking
When trying to identify if there is possession, custody, or title it is important to look at how much freedom the person has with the property. Custody is limited physical control. Possession is full dominion and control and title is legal ownership.
An employee who is given a company car but is only allowed to drive it between point A and B and must leave it at work at the end of shift is more likely than not given custody. Whereas, the employee who is given company car and allowed to drive it wherever is given possession. Title is exactly what it sounds like but also includes cash.
When Was Intent Formed
Another vital question to answer before identifying your larceny crime is the question of when intent was formed. Was intent to steal formed before he obtained custody or possession or tittle or was it formed after? Read your fact pattern carefully because when intent was formed is the key to being accurate!
Next Step; The Breakdown
Now that we have the answers to the most important questions used to identify our larceny crime, let’s review the rule statements for our larcenies.
- Larceny By Trick – The taking of the personal property of another with the intent to permanently deprive by fraudulently inducing the victim to deliver possession of that property.
- False Pretenses – The false representation of a present/past material fact that causes that causes victim to pass title of his possession to the wrongdoer who both knows his representation is false and intends to defraud the victim .
- Embezzlement – Fraudulent conversion of the property of another by one who is already in possession with the intent to permanently deprive.
Now | Later | |
Custody | Larceny | Larceny |
Possession | Larceny by trick | Embezzlement |
Title | False pretenses | No crime |
Practice
- Kelly, Barbara, Jack and Jan gathered for an evening of poker at Kelly’s home. The evening was going well and everyone was having a great time. Half way through the afternoon, Kelly pulled out a new deck off cards that were marked in a way that allowed her to determine the cards held in each players hand. She told all the players she had been given the cards as a birthday gift and was dying to use them. After all the cards were dealt, Kelly determined that she held three tens and that Jack held three nines. Barbara and Jan quickly dropped out of the bidding, but Kelly and Jack raised the pot to $500 before Kelly won the hand and $300 of Jack’s money. If Kelly is convicted of common-law larceny by trick, rather than obtaining property by false pretenses, it will be because:
(A) Her conduct was fraudulent
(B) She obtained title to the money in the pot once she took possession of it
(C) Her conduct only gave her possession of the money in the pot
(D) There was no trespassory taking
2. Borrow owed Lender $5,000.00. Payment was overdue and Lender retained Ace Inc., to collect the debt. Washington, the President of Ace Inc., assigned Little, an employee of Ace Inc. to collect the account. At the time Washington assigned Little to collect the debt, Washington intended to apply the funds in discharge of a debt to Lender for which Ace Inc. and Washington were jointly liable. Little collected the $5,000.00.The amount collected, less Ace Inc.’s fee, was remitted to Lender by Washington as a payment on the debt for which Ace Inc. and Washington were jointly liable.
Did Washington commit a theft crime?
(A) Yes, embezzlement, because Lender’s money was entrusted to Ace, lnc.
(B) Yes, obtaining by false pretenses from Borrow, because at the time the funds were collected Washington intended to use them for his own benefit.
(C) Yes, larceny, because at the time the funds were collected Washington intended to use them for his own benefit.
(D) No, because Lender received all of the funds, less Ace, Inc.’s collection fee, that were collected from Borrow.
3. Based on the fact pattern in question 2. If a crime was committed by Washington, could Ace, Inc. be convicted for the same offense?
(A) Yes, because Washington was President of Ace, Inc.
(B) No, unless Washington is also convicted for the same offense.
(C) No, because a corporation cannot be imprisoned.
(D) No, if the crime involved requires a specific intent.