Chapter Summaries

        Chapter 5 examines the development of legal recognition of property rights, the various methods an offender can use to deprive the owner of his possessory interest in his property, the traditional common law distinctions, and the current trend toward consolidation of theft crimes into one comprehensive statute. The chapter uses “The Family Toy Company” in a scenario to explore the fact-based scenario of larceny (pp. 132–133), illustrated by the New York v. Alamo (1974) case that shows larceny can be accomplished by dominion and control over the item, not asportation (pp. 134–135); the distinction between mere puffery in sales and false pretenses which is using deceit to obtain title to the property (pp. 135–136); Making the Courtroom Connection asks students to make arguments for and against a finding of larceny (p. 135). Also explored are the elements of embezzlement as well as the common situations people who embezzle find themselves in (pp. 136–138); forgery and counterfeiting (pp. 138–139); how scienter is required for receiving stolen property (p. 139); the elements of extortion (p. 140); the contours of financial cybercrime and the intersection of the “Dark Web” and identity theft (pp. 140–144), the scope of which is documented in the EarthLink v. Carmack (2003) case excerpt (pp. 144–145); the consolidated theft statutes (pp. 145–146) that eliminate the artificial distinctions between theft crimes; mail and wire fraud, white-collar crime prosecuted by the fraud statutes (pp. 146–148) illustrated by the U.S. v. Weaver case excerpt that illustrates common business schemes that run afoul of fraud statutes (pp. 148–150); money laundering (p. 151) and the elements of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (pp. 152–153); an examination of burglary with the case excerpt of Murphy v. State (2012), a shooting in health-care clinic to show how burglary is not stealing, but unlawful entry with the intent to commit a felony once inside (pp. 154–157); and the chapter closes with the property crimes of arson and criminal mischief (pp. 157–158).