Commonwealth v. Davis

The defendant was convicted of larceny of property with a value in excess of $250, G. L. c. 266, § 30(1). He argues that the judge erred in denying his motion for a required finding of not guilty, based on what he claims is a failure of proof of two elements of the offense, the intent to steal, and an asportation, or taking away, of the allegedly stolen merchandise. The evidence against the defendant was that he removed a “multimedia kit,” valued in excess of $250, from the shelves of a Lechmere store at the Cambridge Galería and tore off the magnetic sticker that would, unless demagnetized…