Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Olin

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided November 24, 1986No. 15753Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWalters, Chief Judge

I agree with Part I of the lead opinion, upholding the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s finding that Olin displayed an operable firearm during the commission of the robbery. However, with respect to Part II, I am not persuaded that the district court erred in refusing to give din’s requested instruction. For that reason, my vote is to affirm the judgment of conviction.

It is well settled that robbery was recognized as a crime at common law. In fact, LaFave points out that the crime of robbery was created before that of larceny. W. LAFAVE & A. SCOTT, HANDBOOK ON CRIMINAL LAW §…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Traxler v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1952
  2. People v. BanksIllinois Supreme Court · 1979
  3. State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1976
  4. Bell v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1981
  5. Litteral v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1981

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API