State v. Suady

Defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery, aggravated battery, and attempted aggravated robbery based on an incident in which Defendant snuck into a victim’s vehicle, held a knife to the victim’s throat as the victim was driving, and demanded the victim’s money. After the victim jumped out of the vehicle, Defendant backed the vehicle to where the victim was standing, got out of the vehicle, and continued demanding the victim’s money, ultimately without success. The Court of Appeals reversed Defendant’s conviction of aggravated robbery, concluding that Defendant never formed the specific intent to take Defendant’s vehicle and that the brief taking of the vehicle was merely incidental to his failed attempt to rob Defendant of his money. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the plain language of the robbery statute creates no requirement of specific intent and requires only a “taking” of property, whether the taking is incidental or intentional. View "State v. Suady" on Justia Law