RULES MODEL PENAL CODE NEW YORK PENAL COMMON LAW

CODE
NO. Does not acknowledge. NO. Does not acknowledge. If the legislative intent is unclear to the Court, it
LENITY Rule of Strictly Construed statutes DOES NOT is to be interpreted in favor of the
APPLY
If intends to harm one person, but harms If intends to harm one person, but harms The intent follows the bullet if you had intent
another, s intent is transferred and mens rea is another, s intent is transferred and mens rea is but hit the wrong person. (same)
TRANSFERRED
satisfied. satisfied.
INTENT (Only when there is intent to harm any human (Only when there is intent to harm any human
being) being)
When knowledge of the existence of a particular NO. Does not acknowledge. NO. Does not acknowledge.
fact is an element of an offense, such knowledge
WILLFUL BLINDNESS is established if a person is aware of a high
probability of its existence, [unless they
actually believe the risk doesnt exist].
Circumstantial evidence is not enough to convict
CIRCUMSTANTIAL
a person unless there is no other reasonable
EVIDENCE hypothesis of innocence.
ATTENDANT If no mens rea, read in RECKLESSNESS If not mens rea, read in CRIMINAL
NEGLIGENCE
CIRCUMSTANCES
PRINCIPLE OF 1.05 same as NYPL 5.05 No punishment without law

LEGALITY
Not an excuse unless: Not an excuse unless:
1) factual mistake negates mental state 1) factual mistake negates mental state
requirement requirement
MISTAKE OF FACT 2) statute allows mistake of fact defense 2) statute allows mistake of fact defense
3)factual mistake supports a defense of
justification
Ignorance is not excuse unless: (Broader) Ignorance not an excuse unless:
1) based on an official statement of law with 1) based on an official statement of law in a
reasonable reliance, afterward determined statute or enactment or
MISTAKE OF LAW invalid or erroneous. 2) an interpretation of the statute by a public
(ignorance of law) servant legally charged with the responsibility of
administering, enforcing, or interpreting such
law.
3) Statute allows mistake defense
STATUTORY When a mens rea term is used in a statute, it is When a mens rea term is used in a statute, it is
INTERPRETATION presumed to apply to all of the MATERIAL presumed to apply to all of the elements of the
elements of the statute. statute.
(Does not apply to negligence.) If conduct requires mental state and statute has
no requirement, court may read in mens rea
 UNLESS it is a strict liability offense.

2.02- Purposefully conscious objective to 15.05- Conscious objective to cause result; can Specific Mens Rea (Elemental; in the statute)
INTENTIONALLY cause the result; aware of attendant be inferred from natural and probably Morally Blameworthy state of mind
circumstances consequences of conduct
2.02- Aware of the nature of conduct or 15.05- Aware conduct is of such nature or such Specific Mens Rea (Elemental; in the statute)
KNOWINGLY attendant circumstances; aware that conduct is circumstances exist. Morally Blameworthy state of mind
practically certain to bring result
2.02- Same as NYPL 15.05- Aware and consciously disregards a General Mens Rea- broad; the prosecutor needs
substantial and unjustifiable risk; risk = a gross to only prove actus reus with a blameworthy
RECKLESSNESS deviation from the standard of care a reasonable (wicked) state of mind
person would observe
2.02- Same as NYPL 15.05- Failure to perceive a substantial and General Mens Rea- broad; the prosecutor needs
(Criminal) unjustifiable risk; failure to perceive risk = a to only prove actus reus with a blameworthy
NEGLIGENCE gross deviation from the standard of care a (wicked) state of mind
reasonable person would observe
Negligently causes death 210.4 With criminal negligence, one causes death of 1. A person is guilty of criminal homicide if he
CRIMINALLY another. purposely, knowingly, recklessly or negligently
NEGLIGENT causes the death of another human being.
HOMICIDE 2. Criminal homicide is murder, manslaughter or
NYPL 125.10 negligent homicide.

Criminal homicide that is committed recklessly
SECOND DEGREE OR Murder committed under EED. The
reasonableness of such explanation or excuse
MANSLAUGHTER shall be determined from the viewpoint of a
NYPL 125.15 person in the actors situation under the
circumstances as he believes them to be.
FIRST DEGREE
MANSLAUGHTER
NYPL 125.20
SECOND DEGREE 1. Except as provided in 210.3(1)(b), criminal
MURDER homicide constitutes murder when:
NYPL 125.25 (a) it is committed purposely or knowingly or
(b) it is committed recklessly under
circumstances manifesting extreme indifference
of human life. Such recklessness and
indifference are presumed if the actor is engaged
1) Recklessly causes the death of another person
OR
2) Abortional Act causing females death OR
3) Intentionally causes death by aiding a person
in suicide
1) When one intends serious injury but causes
death of a person OR
2) Murder + E.E.D OR
3) Commits an abortional act and causes
females death OR
4) With intent to injure a person under 11 years
old, recklessly engages in conduct creating a
grave risk of serious injury and causes the death.
1) Intentionally causes death unless aiding in Killing of a Human Being with Malice
suicide or EED. Aforethought (4 types):
2) Depraved indifference for life and recklessly 1. Intent to kill
engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of 2. Intent to cause serious bodily injury
death 3. Depraved or Malignant Heart
3) Causes death of non-felon during a Felony 4. Commission of a felony
[Felony Murder, no culpability needed]
4) Depraved indifference for life and recklessly
 or is an accomplice in the commission of, or an
attempt to commit, or flight after committing or
attempting to commit robbery, rape or deviate
sexual intercourse by force or threat of force,
arson, burglary, kidnapping or felonious escape.
See above.
FIRST DEGREE
MURDER
NYPL 125.27
EXTREME EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE:
allows mitigation from murder to manslaughter.
Same as NYPL except can also act under
DEFENSES TO Mental Disturbance.
MURDER
Depraved Heart; or Abandoned or Malignant
IMPLIED MALICE Heart
FELONY MURDER Recklessness and indifference are presumed if
actor/accomplish is engaged in commission or
attempt or flight of a felony.
engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of
death or serious injury to someone under 17 yrs
old
5) Causes the death of a person under 14 yrs old
while committing a criminal sexual act.
1) Intentionally causes death and intended
victim was an officer, witness, or judge; OR
2) Murder after confinement/escape from
correctional facility
3) Murder during Felony [Felony Murder, w/
culpability]
4) Murder for money
5)Murder during criminal transaction
6)Previously convicted of Murder
7) Tortured victim; cruel and wanton manner
8) Serial Killings: caused death of 2+ ppl in NY
in similar fashion
9) Killing during Terrorist Act
EXTREME EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE:
(mitigates Murder to manslaughter)
1) must have acted under E.E.D. (Subjective)
2) Reasonable explanation or excuse from
viewpoint and circumstances as believed them
to be (Objective).
(REQUIRES NO COOLING OFF PERIOD)
Requires an awareness of the risk that the s
conduct will result in the DEATH of another, not
serious bodily injury. (NYPL 125.25(2))
125.25- Killings during a felony
125.27- Murders during a felony
ELEMENTS:
(1) Acting either alone or with one or more other
persons,
(2) he commits or attempts robbery, burglary,
kidnapping, arson, rape in the first degree,
criminal sexual act in the first degree, sexual
abuse in the first degree, aggravated sexual
abuse, escape in the first degree, or escape in the
second degree, and,
(3) in the course of and in furtherance of such
crime, or in immediate flight therefrom,
1. Except as provided in 210.3(1)(b), criminal
homicide constitutes murder when:
(a) it is committed purposely or knowingly or
(b) it is committed recklessly under
circumstances manifesting extreme
indifference of human life. Such recklessness
and indifference are presumed if the actor is
engaged or is an accomplice in the commission
of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after
committing or attempting to commit robbery,
rape or deviate sexual intercourse by force or
threat of force, arson, burglary, kidnapping or
felonious escape.
HEAT OF PASSION KILLINGS: allows
mitigation from murder to manslaughter based
on reasonable man standard.
1) must be reasonable provocation for
reasonable man
2) must be no cooling off period
3)Must be causal connection between passion,
provocation and killing
Depraved Heart; or Abandoned or Malignant
Heart
1) The felony must have an independent
felonious purpose from the homicide for rule to
be applied.
2) If the homicide is an integral part of the
felony (ie Assault) the rule cannot be applied.
3) Manslaughter cannot be the basis for
felony murder.
FACTORS CONSIDERED in furtherance:
Time, Distance, Causal Relationship
FACTORS CONSIDERED inherently
dangerous: whether the crime (in the abstract)
can be committed without a death.
 (4) he or another participant causes the death of
a non-felon; AGENCY APPROACH:
1) Rule does not apply if killing was committed
UNLESS: by non-felon;
(1) did not cause homicidal act, AND 2) The acts of one felon can be transferred to
(2) was not armed with deadly weapon, AND another felon;
(3) had no reason to believe any felon was 3) Mere coincidence of homicide is not enough.
armed with a deadly weapon, AND
(4) had no reason to believe any felon intended PROXIMATE CAUSE APPROACH: The rule
to cause serious injury/death. applies if set in motion the acts which
resulted in the victims death
(NYPL does not apply rule to felons killed
during felonies)
(1) Sexual Intercourse with female (not wife) Sexual Intercourse: (No Mens Rea but may 1) Sexual Intercourse
AND read in INTENT) 2) By FORCE or threat:
(2a) by force or threat of imminent death or 1. By forcible compulsion; or a) Either the victim resisted and the
resistance was overcome;
serious injury OR 2. Who is incapable of consent by reason of
b) OR she was prevented from resisting by
(2b) gave drugs to prevent resistance OR being physically helpless; or Reasonable Fear.
FIRST DEGREE RAPE (2c) Female unconscious OR 3. Who is less than 11 years old; or 3) Against the will of victim; and
NYPL 130.35 (2d) less than 10 years old 4. Who is less than thirteen years old and the 4) Without Consent
actor is 18 years old or more.
*Not Gender Neutral* *Not Gender Neutral*
**Marital Immunity** *Gender Neutral* **Testimony must be corroborated**
*** ONLY VAGINAL***
***CONSENT not an issue*** **No Marital Immunity in NY**
****INCLUDES ORAL/ANAL**** ***ONLY VAGINAL***
Oral/Anal Sex:
CRIMINAL SEXUAL 1 . By forcible compulsion; or
2. Who is incapable of consent by reason of
ACT IN FIRST
being physically helpless; or
DEGREE 3. Who is less than 11 years old; or
NYPL 130.50 4. Who is less than 13 years old and the actor is
18 years old or more.
Not applicable to statutory rape. Statute must Not applicable to statutory rape. Because NY
have at least a general intent to apply statute. always reads in intent, the defense is always
available.
DEFENSE TO RAPE SUBJECTIVE REQUIREMENT: good faith
(Mistake of Fact) mistake of consent SUBJECTIVE REQUIREMENT: good faith
OBJECTIVE REQUIREMENT: s belief was mistake of consent
reasonable under circumstances OBJECTIVE REQUIREMENT: s belief was
reasonable under circumstances
FAILURE OF PROOF When all elements of a crime cannot be proven. When all elements of a crime cannot be proven. PUBLIC BENEFIT THEORY:
DEFENSE The conduct must be performed and motivated
in the interest of the public to be justified. (must
not be incidental to some self-interest)
 3 circumstances to justify homicide:
(1) Officer commanded to kill
(2) Officer advancing public welfare
(3) Killing to prevent an atrocious forcible
felony
OFFENSE When the actor has satisfied the elements of a crime, but has not caused the harm to be prevented (ie a parent paying ransom for the return of their
MODIFICATION child)

DEFENSE
(Justification)
Prosecution has the burden of disproving Prosecution has the burden of disproving
justification/non-affirmative defenses. justification/non-affirmative defenses.

Defendant has the burden of proving When a defense involves negating an element
BURDEN OF PROOF affirmative/excuse defenses. (EED) of a crime, the prosecution has the burden of
DEFENSE disproving the defense. (Heat of Passion)
(EED & Heat of Passion) EED is not part of murder and the has burden
of proof For example: Prosecution has the burden of
disproving Heat of Passion because it requires
Malice Aforethought, which is an element of
murder.
**OMITS REASONABLENESS** A person may use deadly force if: RETREAT TO THE WALL: The use of
(1) Must be actual or apparent threat of deadly (1) he (objectively) reasonably believes that deadly force in self-defense when there is an
force the other person is using or is about to use avenue of safe retreat.
(2) threat must be unlawful deadly force OR CASTLE DOCTRINE: A mans home is his
(3) must believe he was in imminent danger (2) he (objectively) reasonably believes the castle and has no duty to retreat from his home.
DEADLY FORCE IN of death/serious harm other person is committing or attempting to
SELF-DEFENSE (4) response was necessary to save himself commit kidnapping, rape, sodomy, or robbery.
JUSTIFICATION EXCEPTION:
NYPL 35.15(2) (1) knows he can retreat with complete safety
and is not in his own dwelling. (Similar to
Castle Doctrine)
(2) was initial aggressor and did not
effectively communicate withdrawl
(3) unlawful combat by agreement
NON DEADLY FORCE Requires you to retreat if attacked by co- Physical force allowed if he reasonably believes:
IN SELF-DEFENSE workers but you do not have to retreat from non- (1) necessary to defend self or third party
coworkers at a work place. (Domestic Violence (2) from use or imminent use of unlawful
JUSTIFICATION purposes) physical force by other person
NYPL 35.15 EXCEPTION: no defense where
(1) provoked the other person with intent to
cause injury
(2) was the initial aggressor and did not
effectively communicate their withdrawal from

If the reasonably believes that another is in
imminent danger of unlawful force from
another person, even if mistaken, the may
raise the defense.
DEFENSE OF OTHERS Only available if a person acts to prevent
(Justification) UNLAWFUL harm of another.
May include embryos and fetuses.
Rejects ALTER EGO Theory.
DEFENSE OF Generally, the use of deadly force solely to
protect property may not be used UNLESS the
PROPERTY intrusion is such that the person would be
(Justification) justified in taking life or inflicting bodily harm.
MPC 3.02
(1) Actor must believe the act is needed to
prevent greater evil (subjective)
(2) There must be no alternative
(3) The harm caused must be proportionate to
NECESSITY DEFENSE
the harm avoided (NOT SUBJECTIVE)
(Justification)
Defense may still be allowed if actor caused the
harm seeked to be prevented recklessly or
negligently.
DURESS (EXCUSE) NO IMMANENCY
Duress defense if:
(1) Another person unlawfully threatened to kill
or grievously injure or another person and
(2) the was not at fault in exposing himself to
the threat
-Can be a defense to any crime involving human
unlawful threats.
If the belief is reasonable but mistaken, he
would still not be liable for the crime.
-If the believe is reckless or negligent, can
combat
(3) combat by agreement not authorized by law
If the reasonably believes that another is in
imminent danger of unlawful force from
another person, even if mistaken, the may
raise the defense.
Only available if a person acts to prevent
UNLAWFUL harm of another.
May include fetuses and embryos. (EXCEPT in
homicide)
Rejects ALTER EGO Theory.
35.20 Allows use of non-deadly force and only
allows deadly force to prevent arson or
burglary of a dwelling or occupied building as
long as the actor is in control of the building
NYPL 35.05(2)
(1) Actor must believe the act is needed to
prevent greater evil (subjective)
(2) There must be no alternative
(3) The harm caused must be proportionate to
the harm avoided
(OBJECTIVE)
(4) Threat must be immenint
-DOES NOT allow defense if the actor is the
cause of the harm.
ELEMENTS:
(1) coerced
(2) with imminent use
(3) of unlawful force upon him or third person
and
(4) the threat would cause a reasonable person
to not resist
-Can be a defense to any crime involving human
unlawful threats.
**IF recklessly or intentionally places himself
in a situation where duress is likely, there is NO
ALTER EGO RULE: Defense is only available
if the person threatened would have a self
defense claim. Example: If B is an undercover
cop and C is knowingly resisting arrest, and A
jumps in to stop B reasonably believing that B is
an aggressor using unlawful force; A would not
have the defense of others because C knew that
the force was lawful.
Generally, the use of deadly force solely to
protect property may not be used UNLESS the
intrusion is such that the person would be
justified in taking life or inflicting bodily harm
Common Law
(1) Actor must believe the act is needed to
prevent greater evil (subjective)
(2) There must be no alternative
(3) The harm caused must be proportionate to
the harm avoided (NOT SUBJECTIVE)
Does not allow the defense to justify murder.
Duress defense if:
(1) Another person unlawfully threatened
(2) imminently to kill or grievously injure or
another person and
(3) the was not at fault in exposing himself to
the threat
-NEVER A DEFENSE TO MURDER. The
actor must choose to resist rather than kill
another person.
-DOES NOT MITIGATE TO
MANSLAUGHTER
 only be guilty of a reckless or negligent crime
MPC 2.08
Allows defense if it negates an element of an
offense (except purposeful or knowing conduct);
If the actor would have been aware of the
VOLUNTARY risks when he/she was sober and disregarded
INTOXICATION them when drunk, the defense should not be
DEFENSE applicable. (no defense for reckless conduct)
(Failure of proof defense)
Not liable if the lacked substantial capacity
to appreciate the criminality [wrongfulness]
of his conduct resulting from mental disease or
defect OR
Not liable if the lacked substantial capacity
to conform his conduct to the law resulting
from mental disease or defect.
(Easier to Acquit that MNaghten Test)
INSANITY DEFENSE
(Excuse)
- Degree of inchoate offense is determined by
INCHOATE OFFENSES degree of objective crime.
(Punishment Generally) - Punishment for attempt and punishment for the
crime are the SAME.
Applies to everything: attempt, solicitation,
MERGER RULE FOR and conspiracy (generally). A person can be
INCHOATE convicted of ONLY ONE CRIME: Attempt,
Solicitation, Conspiracy, or Crime
OFFENSES:
A person cannot be
convicted of both attempt
and completion
DEFENSE**
Similar to MPC,
NYPL 15.25
Defense is available if it negates the required
mental state of a staute.
NYPL 15.05(3)
Allows the defense only to intentional and
knowing conduct but No defense where the
conduct is reckless or negligent.
INVOLUNTARY CAN BE COMPARED TO
AN EXCUSE BY INSANITY.
NYPL 40.15
As result of mental defect, lacked substantial
capacity to know or appreciate either
(1) nature and consequences of conduct OR
(2) such conduct was wrong.
SOMETIMES INVOLUNTARY
INTOXICATION
OPPOSITE OF MPC
Punishes attempted crimes less harsh than actual
crimes EXCEPT for serious offenses.
Only applies to Attempt.
A person can be guilty of both
solicitation/conspiracy AND attempt/crime.
Similar to NYPL& MPC
Defense can only be applicable when the offense
has a specific intent requirement.
(1) MNaghten Test
Insanity defense if the was laboring under a
defect of reason due to disease of mind, as not
to know the nature and quality of the act OR
does not know what he is doing is wrong.
(2) Irresistible Impulse/Control Test
Although may know his conduct is wrong, is
unable to control an irresistible urge to
commit an offense due to complete destruction
of the governing power of the mind.
(3) Durham/Product Rule
Not criminally responsible if his unlawful act
was the product of mental disease or mental
defect. (Too broad; depended too much on
expert witness)
Applies to Attempt and Solicitation.
Solicitation Conspiracy
Attempt Completed Crime.
(Generally the merger rule applied to conspiracy
too. However, courts do not apply it to
conspiracy today)
 Substantial Step Test: Applies when an actor Guilty of attempt when a person: MENS REA:
purposefully acts or omits anything which the 1) MENS REA: intends to commit a crime 1) Must intend commit crime
actor believes to be a substantial step in a a) Attempted result crimes: the must 2) Must intend the result (beyond reasonable
course of conduct planned to culminate the intend the conduct AND the result doubt)
commission of a crime. b) Attempted conduct crimes: need not
intend the result, only conduct must be ACTUS REUS:
The possession of tools or weapons needed for intentional. Applies the LAST ACT TEST: if the actor
the crime at the place of commission may c) Attendant Circumstances: same mens commits the last act necessary to commit a
constitute an attempt. rea applies to AC for the attempted crime as crime, the is guilty of an attempt. (ie, lighting
the completed crime the fuse of a bomb but the bomb fails to
ATTEMPT CRIMES
explode)
NYPL 110.00 2) ACTUS REUS: engages in conduct which
tends to effect the commission of such crime. Another test is UNEQUIVOCALITY TEST
NY applies the DANGEROUS (RES ISPA LOQUITUR) attempt occurs when
PROXIMITY TEST (the greater the the conduct manifests an intent to commit a
gravity and probability of the conduct in crime. DOES NOT take into account statements
nearness to a crime, the more likely an regarding the act. (The act speaks for itself)
attempt)
**Look outs or wheelmen do not engage in
the actus reus. Must look at ACCOMPLICE
LIABILITY**
MERGES IN MORE SERIOUS CRIME **NO MERGER RULE** MERGES INTO MORE SERIOUS CRIME.
ELEMENTS (similar NYPL) ELEMENTS (similar NYPL)
ELEMENTS:
1) With intent that another engage in conduct
SOLICITATION constituting a crime,
(Offer to Attempt) 2) he [intentionally] requests or attempts to
NYPL 100.00 cause a person to engage in such conduct.

**Communication of the request to the other

person need not be complete. need only to
intend to communicate to satisfy actus reus**
CONSPIRACY MPC 5.03 ELEMENTS: 105.00 (MR) TWO INTENTS:
(Acceptance to offer of Conspiracy if: 1) with intent that conduct constitute a crime 1) Intend to combine with others
1) purposefully promotes the commission of a performed, 2) Intend to accomplish illegal objective
attempt) crime 2) he [intends] to agree with one or more
NYPL 105.00 & 2) purposefully agrees with other person to persons to engage in or cause such conduct PINKERTON RULE: each co-conspirator is
NYPL 105.20 engage in conduct constituting a crime 3) (AR)105.20: there must be an overt act in responsible for crime if: (1) crime was
furtherance of a conspiracy, not just the reasonably foreseeable (2) and in furtherance of
Follows UNILATERAL THEORY: only one agreement conspiracy. (Everyone guilty of everything)
conspirator needs to agree to be guilty of
conspiracy Follows UNILATERAL THEORY: ONLY Follows BILATERAL THEORY: Conspiracy
ONE CONSPIRATOR needs to agree to be requires TWO OR MORE ACTORS to intend to
K.A.P.P. Factors Intention may be guilty of conspiracy. agree to commit a crime.
 inferred from:
1) Knowledge of crime K.A.P.P. factors (see MPC) The conspiracy itself is enough to establish
2) Association with conspirators intent.
3) Presence at the scene of crime ***REJECTS PINKERTON***
4) Participation (sometimes)

***REJECTS PINKERTON***
Recognizes as an affirmative defense to attempt. 40.10(3). The abandonment must be:
ABANDONMENT
1) Complete (not postponed)
(Defense to Attempt) 2) Voluntary (independent decision)
With the purpose of facilitating a crime, a Requires: Principle in 1st degree: one who actually
person: 1) Act with MR indicated in statute commits crime.
(1) solicits the commission; OR 2) intentionally aids, requests, or solicits another Principle in 2nd degree: one who aids,
(2) aids or agrees or attempts to aid the person to engage in such conduct AND encourages, or commanded the commission of
commission OR 3) the other person actually engage in such the crime while present at the crime.
(3) with a legal duty to prevent the conduct Accessory before fact: one who aids,
commission, they fail to make a proper effort encourages, or commands while NOT present at
to do so. crime.
ACCOMPLICE
MPC & NYPL: Accessory after fact: with knowledge of
NYPL 20.00 MPC & NYPL: The must intend to engage in such anothers guilt, one renders assistance to a felon
The must intend to engage in such CONDUCT and have the culpability required to hide him from detection.
CONDUCT and have the culpability required by statute to bring about the RESULT.
by statute to bring about the RESULT. (For example: if the statute involves reckless Accessory cannot be charged higher than a
(For example: if the statute involves reckless mens rea, the must still INTEND to engage in principle.
mens rea, the must still INTEND to engage in conduct, but have the reckless mens rea as to the
conduct, but have the reckless mens rea as to the result.)
result.)
LARCENY ONLY APPLIES TO MOVEABLE PROPERTY, NOT LABOR OR SERVICES.
FOUR ELEMENTS OF LARCENY:
(1) trespassory taking (custody and possession)
(2) carrying away (however slight)
(3) personal property of another
(4) Intent to steal
THEFT/LARCENY
Baliees: a non employee given full custody and possession of an item (ie, mail person)
Generally
NYPL 155.05 Break Bulk Doctrine: a person can have lawful possession and custody of a package, however, upon opening the package and taking the contents,
trespassory taking is satisfied.

Continuing Trespass Doctrine: Intent to steal element is still satisfied even though the wrongfully takes property with intent to return it later.

MPC & Common Law

Claims of Right Doctrine: No theft if takes and carries away property she believes to be hers or believes she has a legal right to take possession.
 UNLESS THE PROPERTY WAS ABANDONED, larceny is committed when one:
(1) Takes possession of found goods
LACRCENY
(2) intends to use goods as his own (must exist at time of possession)
(Lost/Found Property) (3) must reasonably believe that the owner can be found.
(determined NOT BY DILLIGENCE, but by nature of property, circumstances it was found, and s honesty in handling property)
ELEMENTS:
(1) with fraudulent intent
(2) conversion of property of another (permanently depriving owner)
(3) Receives property in a non-trespassory manner
EMBEZZLEMENT (4) Breach of trust (must receive the property in trust of another and the conversion breaches the trust)

(Note: If puts money in register and then pockets it, its is unclear how much time is needed to cross from larceny to embezzlement. Maybe larceny if
closed the drawer or waited a longer period of time.)
THEFT BY FALSE PRETENSES:
(1) With intent to defraud,
(2) obtains both possession & title
(3) and the owner somewhat relied upon representations.
FALSE PRETENSES
The false representations may be in the form of conduct, oral, or written.

The false representations need not be the SOLE inducing reason the victim released possession and title.