Fake or not?

[Lefty Scaevola]

This is not a larceny (theft) case, it is a robbery case. Nor (MarkG) is it a federal bank robbery case (it is a state case). The feds stick arbitrary amounts into many laws that do not have them in state or common law, because most of Federal Criminal Statutes are derived from the 'commerce clause' power of the constitution, rather than general police power, which the states have and the federal government does not. Since the Feds have to pretend that they are "regulating interstate commerce" in order to have a bank robbery law, they need to mention some money amount of "interstate commerce" that was affected.

[duke o' york]

From http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-sourc...tty-theft.html

Petty theft is classified as theft of an item or items with a total monetary value under the amount of $500. Anything more than $500 is considered grand theft, in which case the charges will be significantly more serious.

From http://www.louisianadwilawyers.com/legal_glossaryl.html

Larceny: Obtaining property by fraud or deceit.

[Donegeal]

Sorry Lefty... forgot to say "An example would be...".

[Solomwi]

Even then the example doesn't really fit. Lefty's point (at the risk of putting words into his mouth) is that robbery, unlike crimes of the theft family, is not a property crime but a crime of violence. A more proper comparison would be murder. If you shoot a guy dead then take his money, how much money he had is irrelevant to the classification of your murder charge, upon which the eventual sentence depends in large part.

[duke o' york]

Lefty's a lawyer, so I'm definitely in his corner. Whether he'd be in mine if I was ever charged depends on whether I could afford him.

[Solomwi]

Lefty's a lawyer, so I'm definitely in his corner. Whether he'd be in mine if I was ever charged depends on whether I could afford him.

So am I (both a lawyer and in Lefty's corner ).

[Donegeal]

Then lawyers go off in tangents (or at least some of them on poly). My point was that the sentence was more likely a matter of the 3rd strike.

[Dinner]

!5 years is a bit high for a robbery by itself, but news storing on legal matters a notoriously defieceint, commonly leaving out things like 20 page rap sheets of priors.

Maybe he was a repeat offender?

[duke o' york]

So am I (both a lawyer and in Lefty's corner ).

Yeah, but how large is your beard? That's my criterion number 2.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Whether he'd be in mine if I was ever charged depends on whether I could afford him.

I am retired from public practice now; I am just an in house counsel, officer, and evil overlord in commercial property and investment companies. The only legal work I do now is oppressing my tenants and confounding dip**** city authorities.

[Solomwi]

Yeah, but how large is your beard? That's my criterion number 2.

Alas, that one I fail. I shaved my beard in order to improve my employment prospects in the current climate. AND IT WORKED!

[duke o' york]

Even if we begged you?

I've admired your mod work for years - does that not count for something?

[duke o' york]

D'oh. Crosspost.

Never mind, Solomwi, Lefty has removed himself from the market so you're my first choice against the US legal system. Perry Mason retired too right?

[Solomwi]

Then lawyers go off in tangents (or at least some of them on poly). My point was that the sentence was more likely a matter of the 3rd strike.

You made two points in that post. The one about the sentence I agree with, based on my limited information about this case. The one about amount mattering I disagree with in the context of a crime against the person, like robbery.