Opinion ID: 1166658
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Instruction re: Attempted Unlawful Taking.

Text: Appellant next contends that the trial court erred in not giving the following proposed jury instruction pertaining to the crime of attempted unlawful taking of a vehicle. Every person who shall attempt to take or drive away the vehicle of another without the intent to permanently deprive the owner thereof but without the consent of the owner shall be guilty of attempted unlawful taking of the vehicle. The record is devoid of any indication that appellant could have been convicted of this crime as a lesser included offense. NRS 175.501. The test announced by this Court to determine whether a crime is necessarily included in the offense charged is whether the offense charged cannot be committed without committing the lesser offense. Lisby v. State, 82 Nev. 183, 187, 414 P.2d 592, 594 (1966); accord, Holland v. State, 82 Nev. 191, 474 P.2d 590 (1966). Nothing has been presented to show that burglary of the vehicle could not have been committed without committing an attempted unlawful taking of the vehicle. The crimes are separate and distinct, and the trial court properly refused to instruct on that subject.