Lopez

People v. Lopez

Bad Law
2003 Cal. LEXIS 9112·2003 Daily Journal DAR 12669·31 Cal. 4th 1051·6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 432·79 P.3d 548
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 24, 2003S106681California4,322 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chin, J.

The crime of carjacking requires the “felonious taking” of a motor vehicle. (Pen. Code, § 215.) Similarly, the crime of robbery requires the “felonious taking” of personal property. (§ 211.) California courts, following common law, have long held that the “taking” element of robbery requires that a defendant gain possession of the victim’s property and asport or carry it away. (See People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 1165 [ 282 Cal.Rptr. 450 , 811 P.2d 742 ] (Cooper); Perkins & Boyce, Criminal Law (3d ed. 1982) § 2, pp. 343-344 (Perkins).) Does the felonious taking element of the crime of carjacking, like robbery, require asportation or movement of the motor vehicle? We conclude that it does. Because the Court of Appeal came to a contrary decision, we reverse that court’s judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

On July 1, 1999, Wa Vue Yang was seated inside his van in a parking lot when defendant approached him and offered to sell him a watch. When Yang replied that he had a watch, defendant pulled out a gun and shot at the ground. He pointed the gun at Yang and ordered him out of his van. Yang complied, but left his keys in the ignition. Defendant sat in the van and threw his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.