Com. v. Williams, J., Com. v. Williams, J. No. 1708 EDA 2016

Defendant Jamal Williams was convicted after a nonjury trial of third-degree robbery (18 Pa.C.S. § 3701(a)(1)(v)) and attempted theft for an incident at Beneficial Bank in Philadelphia on Oct. 19, 2015.
Victim, a 77-year-old woman, had completed a withdrawal and was leaving when Williams approached from behind, hands in his pockets, and demanded money; she was afraid he might have a weapon but never saw one.
The victim did not give up any property, Williams never touched her, and she retreated back into the bank and reported the incident; she later identified Williams in a photo array.
Trial court found Williams guilty and sentenced him to 1½–3 years’ imprisonment (robbery) plus three years’ probation; attempted theft carried no additional penalty.
On appeal Williams argued the evidence was insufficient for robbery because the Commonwealth failed to prove a taking or removal of property from the victim’s person or control.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence sufficed for robbery under § 3701(a)(1)(v) requiring taking or removal of property from the person of another by force	Commonwealth: victim’s fear and defendant’s demand supported robbery conviction	Williams: no physical taking or removal; victim retained control and did not surrender property	Reversed robbery conviction; evidence insufficient—no taking or force compelling surrender

Commonwealth v. Talbert, 129 A.3d 536 (Pa. Super. 2015) (standard for sufficiency review)
Commonwealth v. Brown, 484 A.2d 738 (Pa. 1984) (force exists when victim is compelled to part with control of property)
Commonwealth v. Moore, 494 A.2d 447 (Pa. Super. 1985) (robbery requires taking from the person—no robbery where property taken from counter)
Commonwealth v. Lloyd, 151 A.3d 662 (Pa. Super. 2016) (robbery upheld where defendant used force to take property under victim’s dominion)
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 67 A.3d 736 (Pa. 2013) (sentencing impact when convictions reversed)