Baker and others entered a Wal-Mart store shortly after 3:00 A.M. by cutting through the metal door with an acetylene torch. Som
e of the merchandise in the store was moved to the rear door, but the police arrived before the merchandise could be taken from the store. Baker was prosecuted for larceny. He raised the defense that he was not guilty of larceny; there had not been any taking of the merchandise because it had never left the store. Is there enough intent and action for a crime?
There are enough intent and action to commit a crime. By burglarizing the store and moving some goods to the rear door, Baker and his co-travellers have established specific intent to commit larceny.
Specific intent requires planning before the time and the predisposition to commit the act. They have even establish general intent by actually entering the store and cutting through the metal door with an acetylene torch.
Explanation:
Larceny is robbery. The intent to commit a crime by Baker and his co-travellers is established by their actions at the crime scene. They cannot be exonerated because they have not yet taken the goods away from the store. But, it can be established that the intent exists merely by their presence at the crime scene at such an hour of the morning.
That is, the US Supreme Court established that state governments can regulate private industries that affect the "common good" since grain storage facilities were dedicated to public use, therefore , their rates were subject to public regulation.
