People v. Brown

Supreme Court of California (1894)

Defendant: Brown; the defendant was a little boy who was convicted of burglary with the charges that he entered a house with the intent to commit larceny. The boy testified that he did enter the house and he did take the bike, but he did not intend to keep it. He testified that he only wanted to get back at the owner of the bike (another young boy) who had thrown organges at him. The trial judge instructed that jury that the boy did not have to have the intent of taking the property permanently in order to establish larceny. The judge stated: "I think in this case, for example, if the defendant took this bicycle, we will say for the purpose of riding twenty-five miles, for the purpose of enabling him to get away, and then left it for another to get it, and intended to do nothing else except to help himself away for a certain distance, it would be larceny..." The defendant was convicted.

Issue:- Does the defendant need felonious intent to deprive the owner of the property permanently in order to establish larceny?

Holding: Yes

Legal Reasoning: The court stated that the trial judge instructed the jury that the defendant can be convicted of larceny even if he intended to take the property temporarily. The court ruled that this was not the law. The court ruled that in order for a person to be guilty of larceny, he must have the felonious intent to deprive the owner of the property permanently. The court stated that in the current case, what the defendant did was only trespass. So the court reversed and remanded.

BACK