JUS430_T5_Memorandum of Law - Macomber
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Grand Canyon University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
430
Subject
Law
Date
May 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by sydnimaco
Whalling Law Group, PLLC
3300 West Lakeview Blvd. Office 221B
Phoenix, AZ 85017
Memorandum of Law
To: Kevin Whalling, Esq.
From: Sydni Macomber
Date: December 17, 2023
Subject: Memorandum of law: Personal Property Crimes – Bill Carson Issue
Mr. Whalling is acting as defense counsel for Mr. Bill Carson, who was arrested for armed robbery of a woman’s purse and wallet using a revolver. Facts
Larceny is the theft of a physical possession of another with the intent to permanently deprive the victim of said
possession. Theft and larceny are often used interchangeably when described in law. Robbery is considered when a theft is violent and is frequently seen as a hybrid of larceny, assault, and battery. Simple robbery is considered when the victim was forced to give up their possessions due to verbal threat inflicting fear. Armed robbery is considered when the theft is conducted using a deadly weapon. Embezzlement false pretenses is the theft of money or property by another individual in a position of trust, usually within a company or business by means of deceit or misrepresentation of fact. Embezzlement differs from theft as the only requirement is that the stolen goods be in the offender's legal possession or accessible to the offender. Larceny by trick throughout history is also considered larceny false pretenses. False pretenses is misrepresentation of intent in order to deceit or cheat another out of their possession. This can be done using false promises to the victim in order for them to comply (Smith, C. S., 2022).
The seriousness of property crime charges varies based on a number of variables. These variables could be anything from the use of lethal force to the value of the stolen goods. The criminal charges that are filed are impacted by the injuries that occur during these violent crimes. A society is able to cope with criminal activity in
a few different ways, such as by treating and punishing the offender as well as by controlling the conditions that lead to crime. When someone is punished, it deters not just the offender but also those who follow their leads from committing similar crimes in the future. Furthermore, the retribution theory contends that the criminal must repay society for any harm they cause (F. B. Raymond, n.d.).
The mistake of fact defense is a frequently employed defensive tactic. In support of this defense, the defendant
claims that they did not intend to break the law because they simply misunderstood the particular circumstances surrounding their actions. It is significant to remember that in order for a defendant to be found guilty of most property crimes, intent must be established. Another defense commonly used in property crimes is the coercion defense. The coercion defense argues that the defendant committed the crime as a result of being forced or coerced by another person. The defendant may be released from criminal liability if they can show that they were threatened or under duress by another person. Another tactic to refute charges of property
crime is the consent defense. According to this defense, the defendant was able to carry out the otherwise illegal activity with the property owner's legal permission or consent (Gasner Law, 2023). Finally, a defense for
property crimes is mistaken identity. This defense is used to accuse the victim of falsely identifying the accused
of being the one who committed the crime (Aslett Law Firm, PLLC., 2017).
Discussion
The statute Mr. Carson violates was ARS § 13-1904. This is the Arizona statute for armed robbery, the offense
committed by those who rob someone while utilizing a deadly weapon, having it drawn, or threatening to wield it. Since Mr. Carson threatened to shoot the victim if she did not give him her purse and wallet, the crime falls under this statute. The defenses that may be available for Mr. Carson is the defense of mistaken identity, where he could claim the victim is falsely accusing him of being the person who committed the crime against her. This defense would carry more weight if the crime was committed while dark outside or if the assailant was wearing a mask or disguise (M., D., 2023)
.
Conclusion
Should Mr. Whalling not be able to get the case dismissed, the defendant is likely to be presumptive prison as armed robbery is a Class 2 Felony in the state of Arizona. This crime is punishable by a prison term of 3 years to up to 12 years and 6 months. Additionally, should Mr. Carson's crime be determined to be a “dangerous offense”, he could be sentenced to up to 21 years in prison (M., D., 2023). Mr. Whalling could potentially seek out a plea deal for aggravated assault, with the highest possible prison term being up to 5 years in prison. This charge could be used as Mr. Carson placed the victim in reasonable fear of harm and also used a deadly weapon (M., D., 2023).
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help