Salem Press

Crime and Punishment in the U.S.
Robbery

Definition: Unlawful taking of property from the immediate possession of others through the use of threat of force

Criminal Justice Issues: Robbery, theft, and burglary; violent crime

Significance: Essentially a combination of assault and the wrongful taking of property, robbery is considered one of the most serious crimes, and its associated punishments are among the harshest. The willingness of robbers to subject others to potential violence for pecuniary gain is a justification for its punishments being significantly greater than punishments for either underlying crime.

Robbery has been historically seen as an aggravated form of larceny, with its use or threat of force being the aggravating factor. At common law, the crime consisted of eight elements: trespass or wrongful act that damages a person or property; taking or gaining control of property; carrying away of property; taking of personal, as opposed to real, property; taking property belonging to others; intent to deprive rightful owners of their property permanently; taking of property directly from, or in the presence, of its owners; and using force or intimidation. Defenses against robbery charges often claim that the takers of property believed it to be their own or that that they did not intend permanently to deprive the owners of their property.

As the criminal law regarding robbery has developed, the emphasis on the potential for violence posed by the crime has remained the primary focus. In fact, some states have defined robbery to include taking of property that the offenders believe to be their own. This modification of the definition is consistent with modern legislative trends to discourage self-help remedies that create the potential for physical harm. Additionally, in some jurisdictions, robbery does not include the element requiring offenders to intend to deprive owners of their property permanently. In such jurisdictions, it is unnecessary for the prosecution to prove that defendants had the specific intent of committing a larceny.

The heavy punishments associated with robbery have resulted in robbery cases frequently being litigated by defendants seeking to avoid harsh penalties. Such litigation addresses the question of whether the defendant's acts constitute a use of force. Technically, every taking of property requires the use of at least a token amount of force to seize it physically. For this reason, the amount of force actually applied by a defendant is frequently at issue. For example, the question might arise of whether the force used was actually necessary to accomplish the taking of a purse from the arm of a women walking along a sidewalk. Although jurisdictions may vary in their general perception of whether a purse snatching should be treated as a robbery or simple theft, most jurisdictions focus on robbery's dominant characteristic--the potential for injury to victims. Consequently, if the force necessary to accomplish a purse snatching results in physical injury to the victim or a struggle over possession of the purse, or in some jurisdictions if the victim was aware of the force applied in taking the purse, then the purse snatching constitutes a robbery.

Jurisdictions, which rely upon victims' awareness of the force being applied, argue that a potential for physical injury arises when victims are aware of the applied force because the victim may resist the taking of the property and a struggle ensues. While such an analysis is consistent with the essence of the crime of robbery, it also has the effect of more severely punishing inept purse snatchers and pickpockets who inadvertently apply force that they do not intend and thereby alert their victims.

Another avenue by which defendants have challenged robbery charges is with regard to the requirement that the taking being accomplished through the use of force. At common law, robbery requires that the force be applied either immediately preceding or concurrent with the taking. Under such requirements, the use of force to retain possession of property already taken does not constitute a robbery. Moreover, it would not constitute a robbery if an offender, after taking and unsuccessfully carrying away property, were to use force to flee from apprehension. Many modern robbery statutes avoid this issue by explicitly qualifying the use of force as force used in the attempt or commission, or flight from the attempt or commission of the taking of property.

When a threat of force is the alleged instrument by which an offender obtains property, the threat must be of imminent harm. Threats of future harm generally fall under extortion statutes instead of robbery. Threats of harm do not have to be directed at the victim, but can be directed at other persons such as a relative of the victim.

Prevalence
Robbery is classified in the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports as a violent crime. In 2002, robberies constituted approximately 30 percent of all reported violent crimes in the United States, but only 3.5 percent of all index crimes compiled by the FBI. Only assaults constituted a larger component of violent crimes in 2002.

During the 1990's, robbery, like many other crimes, experienced a decline in the rate of criminal activity. From 1993 to 2002 the robbery crime rate declined approximately 36 percent. By 2002, the robbery rate, while still showing a slight decline from 2001, can be characterized as having stabilized.

Robbery has several distinct subcategories. Bank robbery has often been the focus of the news media and journalism, possibly because of instances in which exceptionally large sums of money have been taken. However, bank robbery constituted only 2.3 percent of robberies in the United States in 2002. A unique feature of bank robbery is the high rate of crimes in which the identities of the perpetrators are determined. Security systems at financial institutions greatly facilitate the identification and apprehension of bank robbers; consequently, in 2001 the identification, or clearance, rate for bank robbery was approximately 48 percent, a rate second only to the murder clearance rate.

In contrast, robberies of individuals on streets and public highways constitute the largest percentage of robberies and have a relatively low clearance rate. In 2002, such crimes constituted almost 43 percent of all robberies. Most such robberies are perpetrated by offenders who are strangers to their victims--a fact that makes their identification difficult.

While overall robberies have been declining, the subcategory of residential robberies showed more than a 4 percent increase in 2002. That increase, along with a small increase in the burglary rate for 2002, apparently represents a greater willingness of criminals to invade residences, a fact that is a grave concern in many communities.

Robberies, by definition, include the use or threat of force. As might be expected, the instruments of force most often used are firearms. Brute force, using hands, fists, or feet, generally runs a close second in frequency. Thus, the vast majority of robbers either use firearms or rely solely upon their own physical strength. Although the potential for injuring victims during robberies might appear to be great, a study of bank robbery found that injuries occurred in only about 2 percent to 4 percent of the crimes.

Other Characteristics of Robbery
Robbery might be characterized as a young man's occupation, as the predominant age bracket of robbers is men eighteen to twenty-five years old. However, juvenile robberies have declined at a rate even greater than that of the decline of adult robberies since the 1990's. In 2002, only 23 percent of all robberies were committed by juveniles.

Robbery is primarily an urban crime. In 2002, the robbery rate for urban areas was more than twice that of suburban counties, and more than four times that of rural counties. The prevalence of certain types of robbery also appear to be associated with population densities of communities. For example, street and highway robbery is most common in urban centers, while bank robberies constitute a much greater percentage of all robberies in rural communities than they do in urban communities.

A study of the relationship of socioeconomic factors with the crimes of homicide, robbery, and larceny in Japan has indicated that unemployment (but not poverty), and uneven distribution of wealth show positive relationships with the incidence of robbery. If the same relationship is valid in the United States, then the higher urban rate of robbery may be attributed to higher unemployment rates associated with inner cities.

Investigation
Because robbery requires the use of force or a threat of imminent force to take property from another's possession, witnesses are always present at robberies, unless the crimes also involve homicides that eliminate the witnesses. Consequently, investigations of robberies primarily are concerned with locating suspects who match descriptions provided by robbery victims. After suspects are apprehended, they must next be proven to be the actual perpetrators of the crimes. The modern proliferation of surveillance cameras in commercial enterprises and financial institutions has greatly facilitated identification of criminals who rob such establishments.

Prosecution
In criminal prosecutions of robbery cases, the force or threat element is often challenged by defendants. Pickpocketing and purse-snatching cases, for example, raise questions about the sufficiency of the force employed in the crimes. State jurisdictions vary considerably with regard to when such incidents constitute robbery. In a few jurisdictions, the rapid snatching of a purse has been characterized as a use of violence, so purse snatching thus automatically constitutes robbery. In some jurisdictions when items attached to the bodies or clothing of victims are taken by sufficient force to break the attachments, the takings are classified as robberies. For example, in one case, an offender who plucked a diamond pin from the shirt of a victim was convicted of robbery because the victim testified he had felt a jerk on his shirt.

A second issue involving the use of force concerns whether the force is actually instrumental in attempting to steal property. For example, if offenders abandon their attempts to take property and then get into physical altercations with the owners of the property, the force they exercised in such altercations does not satisfy the robbery element. Thus, in alleged attempted robberies in which offenders are unsuccessful in obtaining the property, prosecutors must prove that any physical altercations in which the offenders entered are related to their attempts to obtain or retain their victims' property.

Robbery charges often involve alleged threats of force conveyed through the offenders' actions, rather than through their words. In such cases, the prosecution must demonstrate that the offenders intended their actions to have been deliberately threatening to place their victims in fear. The intent of offenders is generally inferred from conclusions that their conduct was actually likely to place a reasonable person in fear. The fact that a victim feels threatened is not by itself determinative because the victim may be unusually susceptible to being frightened. For example, in one case, a clerk was frightened by an offender's act of quickly reaching across a convenience store counter to grab cash from an open register; however, the court concluded the clerk's reaction was insufficient proof that the offender intended that action to frighten the clerk in order to facilitate his taking of the cash.

Traditionally, robberies involving threats of force required the prosecution to prove that the victims did indeed feel threatened and were placed in fear. However, modern statutes frequently focus upon the offenders' intent rather than the question of whether the offenders are successful in achieving that intent. This focus upon an offender's intent and not the degree of success may be carried further in modern statutes with regard to the success of the robber in obtaining possession of the targeted property. Some modern statutes regard crimes of robbery to have been committed when mere attempts to obtain property involve force or threats. Under such statutes, "attempted robbery" convictions are reserved for instances in which robberies are stopped before the offenders employ force or threats.

Punishment
Robbery is a serious offense that is classified as a felony. It is generally divided into at least two degrees for punishment purposes. Forms of robbery receiving the severest punishment generally involve significant injuries to their victims, or the use or threats of use of deadly weapons, such as firearms. Even when offenders merely imply that they possess firearms when they do not, or when they display realistic toy guns, they can be convicted of the more serious degree of robbery.

David Blurton

Further Reading
Baumer, Eric, Julie Horney, Richard Felson, and Janet L. Lauritsen. "Neighborhood Disadvantage and the Nature of Violence." Criminology: An Interdisciplinary Journal (February, 2003). Examination of the socio-economic effects upon the quality of violence associated with assaults and robberies. Investigates whether the use of guns or physical violence is associated with the socio-demographics of the offense and whether the fact an offense occurs in a disadvantaged neighborhood rather than a middle income neighborhood has an effect on the violence.

Dix, George E., and M. Michael Sharlot. Criminal Law. 4th ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1999. General text on substantive criminal law that includes an excellent discussion of robbery.

Kleck, Gary, and Ted Chiricos. Unemployment and Property Crime: A Target-Specific Assessment of Opportunity and Motivation as Mediating Factors. Columbus, Ohio: American Society of Criminology, Criminology: An Interdisciplinary Journal, August 2002. Examines the motivational and opportunity effects of unemployment upon crime with the incidence of robbery serving as one of the measures.

Lee, Matthew. Community Cohesion and Violent Predatory Victimization: A Theoretical Extension and Cross-National Test of Opportunity Theory. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000. Study of community cohesion as a preventive element with regard to assaults and robberies.

Samaha, Joel. Criminal Law. 7th ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2002. General substantive criminal law text discussing robbery among other topics.

See Also
Bank robbery; Blackmail and extortion; Burglary; Carjacking; Criminal law; Felonies; Pickpocketing; Shoplifting.