Court Opinion

ID: 9938253
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 19:02:50.914562+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:36:50.736803
License: Public Domain

To sustain a conviction for first-degree robbery pursuant to §§ 13A-8-41(a)(1) and 13A-8-43(a)(2), Ala. Code 1975, the State must establish that the defendant was armed and threatened to use force in the course of committing a theft. In this case, the State did not present any evidence that the appellant performed any actions that would constitute a theft or an attempted theft. In fact, both Gradic and Guerra specifically stated that the appellant did not say anything to them; that the appellant did not use or threaten to use force against them; and that they did not see the rifle until after law enforcement officers arrived. Also, the appellant specifically told Gradic and Guerra he was not going to rob them. The majority relies on the appellant's suspicious actions and his admission to officers that he intended to use the rifle to scare the employees so they would give him money to affirm the conviction. However, many conclusions as to intent — both criminal and noncriminal — could be drawn based on the appellant's suspicious behavior. Accordingly, because the State did not establish that the appellant was armed and threatened to use force in thecourse of committing a theft, I must respectfully dissent.
 *Page 267