(1)The defendant is charged with the crime of armed robbery. To prove this charge, the prosecutor must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(2)First, the defendant [used force or violence against / assaulted1 / put in fear] [state complainant’s name].2
(3)Second, the defendant did so while [he / she] was in the course of committing a larceny. A “larceny” is the taking and movement of someone else’s property or money with the intent to take it away from that person permanently.3
“In the course of committing a larceny” includes acts that occur in an attempt to commit the larceny, or during the commission of the larceny, or in flight or attempted flight after the commission of the larceny, or in an attempt to retain possession of the property or money.
(4)Third, [state complainant’s name] was present while defendant was in the course of committing the larceny.
(5)Fourth, that while in the course of committing the larceny, the defendant:
[Choose one or more of the following as warranted by the charge and proofs:]
(a)possessed a weapon designed to be dangerous and capable of causing death or serious injury; [or]
(b)possessed any other object capable of causing death or serious injury that the defendant used as a weapon; [or]
(c) possessed any [other] object used or fashioned in a manner to lead the person who was present to reasonably believe that it was a dangerous weapon4; [or]
(d) represented orally or otherwise that [he / she] was in possession of a weapon.
[Add the following paragraph if appropriate:]
(6)Fifth, the defendant inflicted an aggravated assault or serious injury to another while in the course of committing the larceny.
Use Note
1 If needed, a definition of “assault” can be found at M Crim JI 17.1.
2 The “complainant” need not be the owner or rightful possessor of the property taken. He or she can be “any person who is present” while the defendant was in the course of committing the underlying larceny. MCL 750.530.
3 When permanent deprivation of the victim’s property is in dispute, note the ruling in People v Harverson, 291 Mich App 171, 178, 804 NW2d 757 (2010), in which the court stated that “the intent to permanently deprive includes the retention of property without the purpose to return it within a reasonable time or the retention of property with the intent to return the property on the condition that the owner pay some compensation for its return.” If the issue is contested, the court may find it useful to expand upon the definition of “take it away from that person permanently” by explaining that it means the defendant must have intended to
(a) withhold property or cause it to be withheld from a person permanently, or for such a long time that the person loses a significant part of its value, use, or benefit; or
(b) dispose of the property in such a way that it is unlikely that the owner will get it back; or
(c)keep the property with the intent to give it back only if the owner buys or leases it back, or pays a reward for it; or
(d)sell, give, promise, or transfer any interest in the property; or
(e)make the property subject to the claim of a person other than the owner.
The court may select the factually appropriate paragraph(s) from these options.
4 For a definition of “dangerous weapon,” see M Crim JI 17.10.
History
M Crim JI 18.1 (formerly CJI2d 18.1) was substantially revised by the committee in October, 2004, to reflect the elements of the offense as set forth in 2004 PA 128, effective July 1, 2004, MCL 750.529.
Reference Guide
Statutes
MCL 750.529, .530.
Case Law
People v Randolph, 466 Mich 532, 648 NW2d 164 (2002); People v Jolly, 442 Mich 458, 468, 502 NW2d 177 (1993); People v Harverson, 291 Mich App 171, 178, 804 NW2d 757 (2010); People v Scruggs, 256 Mich App 303, 662 NW2d 849 (2003).