The defendant wanted to borrow his neighbor's car to go shopping for lawnmowers. Knowing that the neighbor was out of town for t
he weekend, the defendant opened the neighbor's garage door and took a car key that the neighbor hid in an old coffee can for emergencies. Once inside, the defendant, mistakenly believing that larceny applied only to the taking of items valued at over $100, decided to take the neighbor's lawnmower (worth $75) in order to trade it in on a new mower. However, on the way to the store with the mower, he was involved in an automobile accident, totaling the car. In a common law jurisdiction, of what property is the defendant guilty of larceny
In a common law jurisdiction, the property that the defendant is guilty of larceny is the lawnmower.
Explanation:
Larceny or theft is the intentional possession of someone's property for the purpose of permanently depriving the owner of its use. The property may be the person's identity, intellectual property, services, and personal property. Though the automobile was totally ruined, the neighbor did not initially intend to dispossess the owner of the car. But he intended to dispossess the owner of the lawnmower since he was about to trade it in for a new one, which will belong to him and not the former owner.
This clause has it that is prohibited for a person to be convicted for the same crime more than once. This is a fifth amendment clause that was developed following the palko v Connecticut case. Palko had being charged for first degree murder but he got second degree sentence. The state of Connecticut filed an appeal against him and won the appeal. He was therefore sentenced to death
Explanation: since its a city, its at the local level. If it would be state, it would be larger like for the entire state. And national would obviously be entire country rather than just a state or a single city.
