Stewart v. State case brief summary
455 P.2d 914 (1969)
CASE FACTS
A jury found defendant guilty of attempted robbery. He appealed and argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict. The victim of the crime and two police officers appeared for the state. Their testimony stood uncontroverted and showed that defendant approached the victim, a service station operator and, after brandishing a gun, demanded money. Two police officers drove into the station and saw what was happening. When defendant saw the officers, he directed the victim to bring him two cans of oil and to act as though he, defendant, was purchasing the oil. The officers immediately apprehended defendant. He argued that the attempted robbery was not proved because the evidence showed that he had abandoned his intent to commit the crime when he put down the pistol and left the station.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The judgment of the trial court, which convicted defendant of attempted robbery, was affirmed.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
455 P.2d 914 (1969)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant appealed from a judgment of
the Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County (Nevada), which,
upon a jury's verdict, convicted him of attempted robbery.CASE FACTS
A jury found defendant guilty of attempted robbery. He appealed and argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict. The victim of the crime and two police officers appeared for the state. Their testimony stood uncontroverted and showed that defendant approached the victim, a service station operator and, after brandishing a gun, demanded money. Two police officers drove into the station and saw what was happening. When defendant saw the officers, he directed the victim to bring him two cans of oil and to act as though he, defendant, was purchasing the oil. The officers immediately apprehended defendant. He argued that the attempted robbery was not proved because the evidence showed that he had abandoned his intent to commit the crime when he put down the pistol and left the station.
DISCUSSION
- The court disagreed and held that the attempted robbery was completed when defendant produced his pistol and demanded the money, and the fact that he was apprehended on the spot did not lessen his guilt.
- Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court was affirmed.
CONCLUSION
The judgment of the trial court, which convicted defendant of attempted robbery, was affirmed.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment