State v. Langis case brief summary
444 P.2d 959 (1968)
CASE FACTS
The lower court convicted defendant of the crime of larceny of a motor vehicle and the court affirmed. The court found that there was proof that defendant had intended to deprive the car owner of the vehicle permanently as set out in Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.310. Defendant had claimed he was going to drive the car to another city and leave it there for the owner to retrieve. He claimed the lower court's jury instruction on the proof required was in error because there was no evidence of an intent to abandon the car in circumstances that would render recovery by the owner difficult or unlikely.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the decision of the lower court that convicted defendant of larceny of a motor vehicle.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
444 P.2d 959 (1968)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant sought review of the decision
of the Circuit Court, Lane County (Oregon) that convicted defendant
of larceny of a motor vehicle.CASE FACTS
The lower court convicted defendant of the crime of larceny of a motor vehicle and the court affirmed. The court found that there was proof that defendant had intended to deprive the car owner of the vehicle permanently as set out in Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.310. Defendant had claimed he was going to drive the car to another city and leave it there for the owner to retrieve. He claimed the lower court's jury instruction on the proof required was in error because there was no evidence of an intent to abandon the car in circumstances that would render recovery by the owner difficult or unlikely.
DISCUSSION
- The court disagreed and found there was evidence from which the jury could have found defendant intended to abandon the car in such a manner.
- The substance of the jury instruction was also correct because intent to deprive the owner permanently was inferred from abandonment.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the decision of the lower court that convicted defendant of larceny of a motor vehicle.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment