State v. Shepard
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
1Opinion of the Court
OPINON
2Per curiam
Does the crime of attempted larceny from the person require an attempted taking of an object that actually was on or attached to the victims physical person? Or is it enough that, when the perpetrator attempted to take the object in question, it was within the victims immediate presence and control, even though it was not touching or attached physically to the victim’s person? ■ A Superior Court trial justice opted for the latter interpretation, and, for the reasons explained below, we concur that this was the proper construction.
Facts and Travel
The defendant, Daniel S. Shepard, appeals…
3Cases cited13 opinions
- People v. McElroyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- State v. KobylaszSupreme Court of Iowa · 1951
- State v. RandallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- State v. BuckomSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
- Terral v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1968
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by14 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ShambergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- People v. PierceIllinois Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. ArroyoSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2004
- State v. RodriquezSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1999
- State v. BrennanSupreme Court of Vermont · 2001
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.