JUS430_T5_Memorandum of Law
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Grand Canyon University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
430
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by ColonelFlowerBat17
Whalling Law Group, PLLC
3300 West Lakeview Blvd. Office 221B
Phoenix, AZ 85017
Memorandum of Law
To: Kevin Whalling, Esq.
From: Savanah Cruz Date: November 12, 2023 Subject: Personal Property Crimes – Bill Carson
Issue
Defendant Bill Carson, who stated he would shoot a female customer with a handgun if she failed to give up her money and purse, was taken into custody on charges of armed robbery.
Facts
Various forms of theft crimes exist, such as larceny, robbery, embezzlement, false pretenses, and larceny by trick. Larceny involves unlawfully taking and carrying away another person's tangible personal property with the intention of permanently retaining the stolen items. Embezzlement, typically a white-collar crime, occurs when an individual misappropriates property entrusted to them or appropriates such property, as seen in cases
like a business overbilling customers and pocketing the surplus for personal gain. False pretenses entail obtaining ownership of someone else's property through the use of false statements that suggest lawful possession or the existence of certain facts, all with the intent to defraud. Larceny by Trick is akin to false pretenses, but in this case, it involves acquiring physical possession of another person's property through false
statements regarding the existence of certain facts (Lippmann, 2021).
The United States operates as a capitalist society, emphasizing the significance of private property rights as a foundation for trade, the distribution of goods, and overall development. A personal property crime involves the wrongful deprivation of personal property rightfully earned and acquired by its owner, now in the possession of an individual who did not obtain it through lawful means. This situation has a significant economic repercussion. It is crucial that these offenses are not left without consequences, as they can have a profound economic impact. Allowing personal property crimes to go unpunished could erode the incentive for individuals to work diligently and lawfully to acquire their property. This, in turn, jeopardizes the fundamental underpinning of economic prosperity. Defenses can be raised against personal property crimes, and two notable examples are intoxication and duress, both of which are considered affirmative defenses. In the context of affirmative defenses, even if it is established that the defendant committed the alleged acts, they may still be absolved of criminal or civil liability (
Affirmative Defense
, n.d.). Intoxication, like other criminal cases, hinges on the argument that the defendant was not in the right mental state to form the necessary intent, which is particularly crucial in crimes such as theft. In the case of the defense of duress, also known as coercion, the defendant must demonstrate that they were facing imminent danger and resorted to committing the crime because failing to do so would have put their well-being at risk from another source.
Discussion
Mr. Carson appears to be in direct violation of A.R.S. 13-1904, which deals with armed robbery classification (Shouse Law Group, 2023b). Specifically, his intent to cause physical injury with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument places him in this legal classification. In this case, it seems that there are limited potential defenses available to Mr. Carson because he directly threatened to harm the female customer should
she not comply with his demand to give him her purse. One potential defense that might be considered is intoxication. If it can be established that Mr. Carson was intoxicated at the time of the incident, it could be argued that he did not possess the necessary mental capacity to form the intent required for the crime. However, it's important to note that you mentioned there is no mention of intoxication in the case. Without evidence of intoxication or other valid defenses, Mr. Carson's actions may make him susceptible to prosecution
under the law for theft by extortion as described in A.R.S. 13-1804. Please consult with a legal professional for specific advice or to discuss the details of the case further.
Conclusion
Mr. Carson is unable to have the charges against him dropped or negotiate a plea deal for a lesser charge, the
potential penalties he may face will depend on his prior criminal record. It's important to note that sentencing and penalties can vary based on the specific circumstances of the case, the jurisdiction, and other factors. Legal representation is crucial in understanding and navigating the potential outcomes and consequences in a criminal case. If you or someone you know is facing legal charges, it's advisable to consult with an attorney who can provide guidance and support throughout the legal process.
Citations
affirmative defense
. (n.d.). LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/affirmative_defense
Lippmann, M, (2021). Contemporary criminal law: Concepts, cases, and controversies
(6
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISBN: 13-9781071812976
DM Cantor. (2023, March 20). Extortion - Phoenix Extortion Defense Specialist DM Cantor
. https://dmcantor.com/fraud-
theft-crimes/extortion#:
Shouse Law Group. (2023b, August 8). ARS § 13-1904 – Armed Robbery - Arizona Law & Penalties
. https://www.shouselaw.com/az/defense/laws/robbery/armed-robbery/#:~:text=In%20particular%2C%20a
%20violation%20is,of%20seven%20and%2021%20years.
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