People v. Lopez
79 P.3d 548 · California Supreme Court · 2003
Facts
Wa Vue Yang was seated in his van in a parking lot when the defendant approached him, offered to sell a watch, then pulled out a gun and shot at the ground. The defendant pointed the gun at Yang and ordered him out of the van. Yang complied, leaving his keys in the ignition. The defendant sat in the van and placed his backpack on the passenger seat. Yang returned to retrieve checks, and the defendant pointed the gun at him and pulled the trigger twice, but it did not fire. The defendant then fled from the van, leaving his backpack inside. The van was never moved.
Procedural history
After a court trial, the trial court found the defendant guilty of carjacking. The Court of Appeal affirmed the carjacking conviction, rejecting the defendant's claim that movement of the vehicle was required. This court granted review to resolve a conflict with another appellate decision, People v. Vargas, which held that carjacking requires vehicle movement.
Issue
Does the "felonious taking" element of the crime of carjacking, like robbery, require asportation or movement of the motor vehicle?
Holding
Yes, the "felonious taking" element of carjacking requires asportation or movement of the motor vehicle. The Court of Appeal's judgment regarding the carjacking conviction is reversed and remanded.
Rule
The "felonious taking" element of carjacking requires asportation or movement of the motor vehicle. California courts have long held that the "taking" element of robbery requires gaining possession and asporting or carrying away the property. When legislation has been judicially construed and a subsequent statute on a similar subject uses identical or substantially similar language, the usual presumption is that the Legislature intended the same construction, unless a contrary intent clearly appears. The legislative history of the carjacking statute does not indicate an intent to alter the meaning of "felonious taking" with respect to the requirement of asportation.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.