Commonwealth v. Lloyd
151 A.3d 662
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2016Background
- In early morning Dec. 2, 2014, Lloyd asked valet attendant Ahmed Indris to unlock a parking-booth, then forced his way inside, pushing Indris aside.
- Lloyd took a plastic bag and removed multiple vehicle keys that Indris had under his control; Indris retreated to a fire station and police were summoned.
- Officers apprehended Lloyd after a brief scuffle in which two officers were injured.
- Lloyd was tried by the court and convicted of third-degree felony robbery (18 Pa.C.S. § 3701) and resisting arrest; acquitted of other charges.
- The court sentenced Lloyd to 11–23 months' incarceration for robbery and two years' probation for resisting arrest; Lloyd appealed, arguing insufficiency of evidence for third-degree robbery.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove robbery as third-degree felony under § 3701(a)(1)(v) (taking from person by force) | Commonwealth: Indris had possession and control of the keys; Lloyd used force to separate Indris from the keys by pushing him and deceiving him into opening the booth | Lloyd: He removed keys from the wall/booth, not from Indris’s person or immediate possession, and there was no struggle while taking the keys, so no force used to take property from a person | Court: Evidence sufficient — Indris had dominion/control and Lloyd used at least slight force (pushing Indris) to separate him from the keys, satisfying § 3701(a)(1)(v) for third-degree robbery |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Doughty, 126 A.3d 951 (Pa. 2015) (standard for sufficiency review; circumstantial evidence may sustain conviction)
- Commonwealth v. Moore, 494 A.2d 447 (Pa. Super. 1985) (distinguishes theft observed by third party from taking from the person; property under victim’s control can be taken from the person)
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 484 A.2d 738 (Pa. 1984) (discusses common-law robbery standards preserved in § 3701)
- Commonwealth v. Bedell, 954 A.2d 1209 (Pa. Super. 2008) (any amount of force suffices where it separates victim from property)
- Commonwealth v. Shamberger, 788 A.2d 408 (Pa. Super. 2001) (property taken in victim’s presence and under immediate control can be theft from the person)