{"id":1318,"date":"2017-09-27T17:44:15","date_gmt":"2017-09-27T17:44:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/?post_type=chapter&#038;p=1318"},"modified":"2017-09-27T17:44:16","modified_gmt":"2017-09-27T17:44:16","slug":"11-4-end-of-chapter-material","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/chapter\/11-4-end-of-chapter-material\/","title":{"raw":"11.4 End-of-Chapter Material","rendered":"11.4 End-of-Chapter Material"},"content":{"raw":"<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n01\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Summary<\/h4>\n        <p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p01\">Crimes against property include theft, crimes connected to theft, and crimes that invade or damage property. Modern jurisdictions criminalize several forms of theft under consolidated theft statutes that grade theft primarily on the value of the property stolen. Larceny under a consolidated theft statute in many jurisdictions is the physical taking or gaining possession of a victim\u2019s personal property by control and asportation, or a false representation of fact, with the intent to keep the property. Embezzlement under a consolidated theft statute is the conversion of a victim\u2019s real or personal property entrusted to the defendant. False pretenses under a consolidated theft statute is the permanent transfer of ownership of real or personal property or services from the victim to the defendant, based on a false representation of fact. The theft of property of low value is typically a misdemeanor (petty theft), while the theft of property of high value (grand theft) is a felony, felony-misdemeanor, or a gross misdemeanor, depending on the circumstances and the jurisdiction. Federal mail fraud, a felony, is the knowing use of the mail to perpetrate a scheme to defraud.<\/p>\n        <p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p02\">Extortion is the purposeful theft of property by a threat of future harm such as bodily injury or exposure of the victim\u2019s crime or secret that subjects the victim to hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Extortion is typically graded as a felony. Robbery is the purposeful theft of property from the victim\u2019s person or presence by force or threat of imminent physical harm. Robbery is typically graded as a serious felony. Receiving stolen property is receiving, buying, selling, disposing of, or retaining stolen property with either knowledge or awareness that the property is stolen or knowledge or awareness of a risk that the property is stolen. Receiving stolen property is typically graded as a felony-misdemeanor or a misdemeanor if the property is of low value and a felony if the property is of significant value.<\/p>\n        <p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p03\">Burglary is either breaking and entering, entering, or remaining on another\u2019s property with the intent to commit a felony, any crime, grand theft, or petty theft once inside. In some jurisdictions, the defendant can burglarize his or her own property. Burglary is typically graded as a serious felony. Criminal trespass is a knowing unauthorized entry onto the property of another. Criminal trespass is typically graded as a less serious felony than burglary, or a misdemeanor if the trespass is into a place, rather than an occupied building or structure. Arson is knowingly burning or damaging by fire property described in the arson statute. Arson is typically graded as a serious felony. Criminal mischief is damaging, destroying, or interfering with property with specific intent or purposely, general intent or knowingly, recklessly, or negligently, depending on the jurisdiction and the degree of the offense. Criminal mischief is typically graded as a less serious felony than arson, a gross misdemeanor, or a misdemeanor.<\/p>\n    <\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-info\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n02\">\n        <h3 class=\"title\">You Be the Legal Textbook Author<\/h3>\n        <p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p04\">Read the statute, and then describe the elements of each of the following crimes. Check your answers using the answer key at the end of the chapter.<\/p>\n        <ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l01\"><li>\n<strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Offenses against computer users<\/strong>: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/florida\/crimes\/815.06.html\">Fla. Stat. Ann. \u00a7\u00a0815.06<\/a>. The statute is available at this link: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/florida\/crimes\/815.06.html\">http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/florida\/crimes\/815.06.html<\/a>. Identify the criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong> (seven possible), criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attendant circumstance<\/strong>, and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong>. How is this crime <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">graded<\/strong>?<\/li>\n            <li>\n<strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Identity theft<\/strong>: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/pennsylvania\/crimes-and-offenses\/00.041.020.000.html\">18 Pa. C.S. \u00a7\u00a04120<\/a>. The statute is available at this link: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/pennsylvania\/crimes-and-offenses\/00.041.020.000.html\">http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/pennsylvania\/crimes-and-offenses\/00.041.020.000.html<\/a>. Identify the criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong> (two possible), <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">criminal intent<\/strong>, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attendant circumstance<\/strong>, and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong>. How is this crime <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">graded<\/strong>?<\/li>\n            <li>\n<strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Unlawful duplication of computer-related material in the first degree<\/strong>: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/new-york\/penal\/PEN0156.30_156.30.html\">N.Y. Penal Law \u00a7\u00a0156.30<\/a>. The statute is available at this link: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/new-york\/penal\/PEN0156.30_156.30.html\">http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/new-york\/penal\/PEN0156.30_156.30.html<\/a>. Identify the criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong> (three possible), <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">criminal intent<\/strong>, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attendant circumstance<\/strong>, and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong>. How is this crime <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">graded<\/strong>?<\/li>\n        <\/ol><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n03\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Cases of Interest<\/h4>\n        <ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l02\"><li>\n<em class=\"emphasis\">People v. Beaver<\/em>, 186 Cal. App. 4th 107 (2010), illustrates the complexity of prosecuting theft under a consolidated theft statute: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=12194560873043980150&amp;q=false+pretenses+theft+of+a+service&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=1999\">http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=12194560873043980150&amp;q= false+pretenses+theft+of+a+service&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=1999<\/a>.<\/li>\n            <li>\n<em class=\"emphasis\">State v. Castillo<\/em>, Docket No. 29, 641 (NM: 2011), discusses the difference between a debit card and credit card for theft: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=8674118418557512209&amp;q=State+v+Castillo+NM&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2010\">http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=8674118418557512209&amp;q=State+v+Castillo+NM&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2010<\/a>.<\/li>\n            <li>\n<em class=\"emphasis\">People v. Nowack<\/em>, 614 N.W.2d 78 (2000), discusses the criminal intent element required for arson: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=3668258956679541189&amp;q=arson+%22specific+intent+crime%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2000\">http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=3668258956679541189&amp;q= arson+%22specific+intent+crime%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2000<\/a>.<\/li>\n        <\/ul><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n04\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Articles of Interest<\/h4>\n        <ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l03\"><li>Bernie Madoff case: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1661462\">http:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1661462<\/a>\n<\/li>\n            <li>Largest hedge fund insider trading case in US history: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/2011\/03\/22\/raj-rajaratnam-jury-hears_n_839281.html\">http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/2011\/03\/22\/raj-rajaratnam-jury-hears_n_839281.html<\/a>\n<\/li>\n            <li>Celebrity burglaries: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nigerianbestforum.com\/generaltopics\/?p=50094\">http:\/\/www.nigerianbestforum.com\/generaltopics\/?p=50094<\/a>\n<\/li>\n            <li>Wildland arson: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.springerlink.com\/content\/h4w5015373m2v200\">http:\/\/www.springerlink.com\/content\/h4w5015373m2v200<\/a>\n<\/li>\n        <\/ul><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n05\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Websites of Interest<\/h4>\n        <ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l04\"><li>Information on arson: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.ncjrs.gov\/App\/Topics\/Topic.aspx?topicid=66\">http:\/\/www.ncjrs.gov\/App\/Topics\/Topic.aspx?topicid=66<\/a>\n<\/li>\n            <li>Cybercrime: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/usao\/priority-areas\/cyber-crime\">http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/usao\/priority-areas\/cyber-crime<\/a>\n<\/li>\n            <li>US DOJ identity theft information: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/criminal\/fraud\/websites\/idtheft.html\">http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/criminal\/fraud\/websites\/idtheft.html<\/a>\n<\/li>\n        <\/ul><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n06\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Statistics of Interest<\/h4>\n        <ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l05\"><li>Burglary: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=321\">http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=321<\/a>\n<\/li>\n            <li>Identity theft: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=42\">http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=42<\/a>\n<\/li>\n        <\/ul><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n07\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Exercises<\/h4>\n        <p class=\"simpara\">From <a class=\"xref\" href=\"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/chapter\/11-1-nonviolent-theft-crimes\/#storm_1.0-ch11_s01\">Section 11.1 \"Nonviolent Theft Crimes\"<\/a><\/p>\n        <ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l06\"><li>Linda has committed <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny<\/strong> because she <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">took<\/strong> personal property belonging to another without consent and with what appears to be the intent to keep it permanently. Shoplifting is typically larceny. A bra is not a high-value item (even in an expensive department store), so Linda\u2019s larceny is probably petty, second-, or third-degree theft under a consolidated theft statute.<\/li>\n            <li>Ellen has committed <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny<\/strong> because she <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">took<\/strong> personal property belonging to another without consent and with what appears to be the intent to keep it permanently. When Ellen put her hand over the Rolex watch, she gained <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">control<\/strong> of it. When she slid it across the counter, this was sufficient <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">asportation<\/strong> of the property because asportation for larceny can generally be any distance\u2014no matter how slight. The Rolex is valued at ten thousand dollars, so Ellen\u2019s larceny is probably grand or first-degree theft under a consolidated theft statute.<\/li>\n            <li>The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed, holding that the lease deposits were held in trust and belonged to the <em class=\"emphasis\">defendant<\/em>, not the lessees. The court also held that the prosecution failed to prove a relationship of <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">trust<\/strong> and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">confidence<\/strong> between the defendant and the lessees, which is required in Minnesota for embezzlement theft under the consolidated theft statute.<\/li>\n            <li>The Court of Appeal of California modified the defendant\u2019s conviction under a consolidated theft statute. The court held that the defendant actually committed attempted <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny by trick<\/strong>, not false pretenses, because he was directed to purchase licensing agreements with the money, which put him in <em class=\"emphasis\">possession<\/em> of it rather than <em class=\"emphasis\">ownership<\/em>.<\/li>\n            <li>The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the defendant\u2019s conviction. The court held that the <em class=\"emphasis\">defendant<\/em> did not have to use the mails or intend that the mails be used by another to be convicted of federal mail fraud. However, because all the mailings involved the defendant\u2019s <em class=\"emphasis\">son<\/em>, who was acquitted of the arson and therefore not involved in a scheme to defraud the insurance company, the defendant\u2019s mail fraud conviction had no basis.<\/li>\n        <\/ol><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n08\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Exercises<\/h4>\n        <p class=\"simpara\">From <a class=\"xref\" href=\"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/chapter\/11-2-extortion-robbery-and-receiving-stolen-property\/#storm_1.0-ch11_s02\">Section 11.2 \"Extortion, Robbery, and Receiving Stolen Property\"<\/a><\/p>\n        <ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l07\"><li>Chuck has committed the crime of <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attempted extortion<\/strong>. Although Chuck threatened to expose Jeremy\u2019s crime of false pretenses with the intent to force Jeremy to pay him two hundred dollars, Jeremy did <em class=\"emphasis\">not pay<\/em> Chuck. Thus the <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong> element of extortion is lacking, and Chuck\u2019s conduct is only attempted extortion.<\/li>\n            <li>The Court of Appeals of North Carolina reversed the defendant\u2019s robbery conviction because he <em class=\"emphasis\">snatched<\/em> the purse, using only the force required to take it from the victim\u2019s possession. Thus the crime was most likely <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny<\/strong> rather than <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">robbery<\/strong>.<\/li>\n            <li>The Court of Appeals of Michigan upheld the defendant\u2019s conviction. Although the court conceded that a theft by larceny requires the intent to <em class=\"emphasis\">permanently<\/em> deprive the owner of personal property, the court held that the term \u201cstolen\u201d in the receiving stolen property statute encompasses more than larceny theft, and thus it includes <em class=\"emphasis\">any taking<\/em> of personal property without permission of the owner.<\/li>\n        <\/ol><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n09\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Exercises<\/h4>\n        <p class=\"simpara\">From <a class=\"xref\" href=\"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/chapter\/11-3-crimes-that-invade-or-damage-property\/#storm_1.0-ch11_s03\">Section 11.3 \"Crimes That Invade or Damage Property\"<\/a><\/p>\n        <ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l08\"><li>Burglary of a <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">dwelling<\/strong> is graded higher than burglary of a structure or vehicle because it is likely that the owners of a dwelling might be inside and might employ protective actions that could lead to <em class=\"emphasis\">injury<\/em> or <em class=\"emphasis\">death<\/em>. Burglary at <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">nighttime<\/strong> enhances the probability that the dwelling owners will be home and makes it more difficult to identify the defendant. This could also enhance the probability of injury or death and reduce the chances of conviction, which does not serve <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">deterrence<\/strong>.<\/li>\n            <li>The Court of Appeal of Florida held that the evidence was <em class=\"emphasis\">insufficient<\/em> to warrant the <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">necessity<\/strong> jury instruction. Although a neighbor to the burglarized residence testified that the defendant rang her doorbell and asked to come in while looking around in a scared manner, and a guest at a party testified that the defendant was slapped by an individual claiming the defendant owed him money, the court held that this evidence did not establish the defendant\u2019s reasonable belief that he was at risk for immediate serious bodily injury.<\/li>\n            <li>The Court of Appeals of Texas dismissed the minor\u2019s judgment of adjudication because the middle school was not located in \u201cthe incorporated city limits,\u201d as was alleged in the State\u2019s petition for adjudication.<\/li>\n        <\/ol><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n10\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Law and Ethics Questions<\/h4>\n        <ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l09\"><li>Whether it is ethical to publish classified information depends on the <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">content<\/strong> of the published material, and requires a balancing of the public\u2019s right to know and the safety risk posed by the publication. If the publication exposes government corruption or another topic that could lead to government reform <em class=\"emphasis\">and<\/em> the risk of harm is minimal, then many would feel the exposure is of high value and ethical.<\/li>\n            <li>The First Amendment complicates the prosecution of WikiLeaks for simply publishing information provided by an informant. Without evidence that WikiLeaks <em class=\"emphasis\">participated<\/em> or <em class=\"emphasis\">assisted<\/em> the government informant, a prosecution of WikiLeaks is a prosecution for <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">speech<\/strong>, and this requires a compelling government interest and a narrowly tailored statute. Of course the government has a strong interest in protecting those involved in national defense; however, government speech has traditionally been accorded the <em class=\"emphasis\">highest<\/em> form of protection from censorship. An additional problem is the Constitution\u2019s prohibition against the enactment of <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">ex post facto<\/strong> laws because it does not appear that there is a statute addressing WikiLeaks\u2019 behavior (government property cannot be copyrighted, trademarked, or patented, so there was no intellectual property infringement).<\/li>\n        <\/ol><\/div>\n    <div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n11\">\n        <h4 class=\"title\">Answers to You Be the Legal Textbook Author<\/h4>\n        <ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l10\"><li>Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong>: access, disrupt, damage, destroy, take, injure, introduce computer contaminant to any computer, computer system, or network. Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>: general intent or knowingly. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Attendant circumstance<\/strong>: without authorization. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Harm<\/strong>: disruption, damage, destruction, or use of the computer to commit a scheme to defraud. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Grading<\/strong>: a felony or a first-degree misdemeanor. Also provides a civil action for damages.<\/li>\n            <li>Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong>: possess or use the identifying information of another person. Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>: specific intent or purposely to further an unlawful purpose. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Attendant circumstance<\/strong>: lack of victim consent. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Harm<\/strong>: identifying information of another is possessed or used to further any unlawful purpose. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Grading<\/strong>: a felony or misdemeanor, depending on the value of property obtained, the prior record of the defendant, and whether the unlawful purpose is a conspiracy or dependent abuse.<\/li>\n            <li>Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong>: copy, reproduce, or duplicate any computer data or program. Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>: general intent or knowingly to deprive the owner of property valued in excess of $2,500, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">or<\/strong> specific intent or purposely to commit or attempt to commit any felony. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Attendant circumstance<\/strong>: with no right to do so. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Harm<\/strong>: computer data or program is copied, reproduced, or duplicated. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Grading<\/strong>: felony.<\/li>\n        <\/ol><\/div>","rendered":"<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n01\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Summary<\/h4>\n<p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p01\">Crimes against property include theft, crimes connected to theft, and crimes that invade or damage property. Modern jurisdictions criminalize several forms of theft under consolidated theft statutes that grade theft primarily on the value of the property stolen. Larceny under a consolidated theft statute in many jurisdictions is the physical taking or gaining possession of a victim\u2019s personal property by control and asportation, or a false representation of fact, with the intent to keep the property. Embezzlement under a consolidated theft statute is the conversion of a victim\u2019s real or personal property entrusted to the defendant. False pretenses under a consolidated theft statute is the permanent transfer of ownership of real or personal property or services from the victim to the defendant, based on a false representation of fact. The theft of property of low value is typically a misdemeanor (petty theft), while the theft of property of high value (grand theft) is a felony, felony-misdemeanor, or a gross misdemeanor, depending on the circumstances and the jurisdiction. Federal mail fraud, a felony, is the knowing use of the mail to perpetrate a scheme to defraud.<\/p>\n<p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p02\">Extortion is the purposeful theft of property by a threat of future harm such as bodily injury or exposure of the victim\u2019s crime or secret that subjects the victim to hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Extortion is typically graded as a felony. Robbery is the purposeful theft of property from the victim\u2019s person or presence by force or threat of imminent physical harm. Robbery is typically graded as a serious felony. Receiving stolen property is receiving, buying, selling, disposing of, or retaining stolen property with either knowledge or awareness that the property is stolen or knowledge or awareness of a risk that the property is stolen. Receiving stolen property is typically graded as a felony-misdemeanor or a misdemeanor if the property is of low value and a felony if the property is of significant value.<\/p>\n<p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p03\">Burglary is either breaking and entering, entering, or remaining on another\u2019s property with the intent to commit a felony, any crime, grand theft, or petty theft once inside. In some jurisdictions, the defendant can burglarize his or her own property. Burglary is typically graded as a serious felony. Criminal trespass is a knowing unauthorized entry onto the property of another. Criminal trespass is typically graded as a less serious felony than burglary, or a misdemeanor if the trespass is into a place, rather than an occupied building or structure. Arson is knowingly burning or damaging by fire property described in the arson statute. Arson is typically graded as a serious felony. Criminal mischief is damaging, destroying, or interfering with property with specific intent or purposely, general intent or knowingly, recklessly, or negligently, depending on the jurisdiction and the degree of the offense. Criminal mischief is typically graded as a less serious felony than arson, a gross misdemeanor, or a misdemeanor.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-info\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n02\">\n<h3 class=\"title\">You Be the Legal Textbook Author<\/h3>\n<p class=\"para\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_p04\">Read the statute, and then describe the elements of each of the following crimes. Check your answers using the answer key at the end of the chapter.<\/p>\n<ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l01\">\n<li>\n<strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Offenses against computer users<\/strong>: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/florida\/crimes\/815.06.html\">Fla. Stat. Ann. \u00a7\u00a0815.06<\/a>. The statute is available at this link: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/florida\/crimes\/815.06.html\">http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/florida\/crimes\/815.06.html<\/a>. Identify the criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong> (seven possible), criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attendant circumstance<\/strong>, and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong>. How is this crime <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">graded<\/strong>?<\/li>\n<li>\n<strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Identity theft<\/strong>: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/pennsylvania\/crimes-and-offenses\/00.041.020.000.html\">18 Pa. C.S. \u00a7\u00a04120<\/a>. The statute is available at this link: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/pennsylvania\/crimes-and-offenses\/00.041.020.000.html\">http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/pennsylvania\/crimes-and-offenses\/00.041.020.000.html<\/a>. Identify the criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong> (two possible), <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">criminal intent<\/strong>, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attendant circumstance<\/strong>, and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong>. How is this crime <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">graded<\/strong>?<\/li>\n<li>\n<strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Unlawful duplication of computer-related material in the first degree<\/strong>: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/new-york\/penal\/PEN0156.30_156.30.html\">N.Y. Penal Law \u00a7\u00a0156.30<\/a>. The statute is available at this link: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/new-york\/penal\/PEN0156.30_156.30.html\">http:\/\/law.onecle.com\/new-york\/penal\/PEN0156.30_156.30.html<\/a>. Identify the criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong> (three possible), <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">criminal intent<\/strong>, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attendant circumstance<\/strong>, and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong>. How is this crime <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">graded<\/strong>?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n03\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Cases of Interest<\/h4>\n<ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l02\">\n<li>\n<em class=\"emphasis\">People v. Beaver<\/em>, 186 Cal. App. 4th 107 (2010), illustrates the complexity of prosecuting theft under a consolidated theft statute: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=12194560873043980150&amp;q=false+pretenses+theft+of+a+service&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=1999\">http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=12194560873043980150&amp;q= false+pretenses+theft+of+a+service&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=1999<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li>\n<em class=\"emphasis\">State v. Castillo<\/em>, Docket No. 29, 641 (NM: 2011), discusses the difference between a debit card and credit card for theft: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=8674118418557512209&amp;q=State+v+Castillo+NM&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2010\">http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=8674118418557512209&amp;q=State+v+Castillo+NM&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2010<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li>\n<em class=\"emphasis\">People v. Nowack<\/em>, 614 N.W.2d 78 (2000), discusses the criminal intent element required for arson: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=3668258956679541189&amp;q=arson+%22specific+intent+crime%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2000\">http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=3668258956679541189&amp;q= arson+%22specific+intent+crime%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,5&amp;as_ylo=2000<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n04\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Articles of Interest<\/h4>\n<ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l03\">\n<li>Bernie Madoff case: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1661462\">http:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1661462<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<li>Largest hedge fund insider trading case in US history: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/2011\/03\/22\/raj-rajaratnam-jury-hears_n_839281.html\">http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/2011\/03\/22\/raj-rajaratnam-jury-hears_n_839281.html<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<li>Celebrity burglaries: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nigerianbestforum.com\/generaltopics\/?p=50094\">http:\/\/www.nigerianbestforum.com\/generaltopics\/?p=50094<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<li>Wildland arson: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.springerlink.com\/content\/h4w5015373m2v200\">http:\/\/www.springerlink.com\/content\/h4w5015373m2v200<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n05\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Websites of Interest<\/h4>\n<ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l04\">\n<li>Information on arson: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.ncjrs.gov\/App\/Topics\/Topic.aspx?topicid=66\">http:\/\/www.ncjrs.gov\/App\/Topics\/Topic.aspx?topicid=66<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<li>Cybercrime: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/usao\/priority-areas\/cyber-crime\">http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/usao\/priority-areas\/cyber-crime<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<li>US DOJ identity theft information: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/criminal\/fraud\/websites\/idtheft.html\">http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/criminal\/fraud\/websites\/idtheft.html<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n06\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Statistics of Interest<\/h4>\n<ul class=\"itemizedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l05\">\n<li>Burglary: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=321\">http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=321<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<li>Identity theft: <a class=\"link\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=42\">http:\/\/bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov\/index.cfm?ty=tp&amp;tid=42<\/a>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n07\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Exercises<\/h4>\n<p class=\"simpara\">From <a class=\"xref\" href=\"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/chapter\/11-1-nonviolent-theft-crimes\/#storm_1.0-ch11_s01\">Section 11.1 &#8220;Nonviolent Theft Crimes&#8221;<\/a><\/p>\n<ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l06\">\n<li>Linda has committed <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny<\/strong> because she <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">took<\/strong> personal property belonging to another without consent and with what appears to be the intent to keep it permanently. Shoplifting is typically larceny. A bra is not a high-value item (even in an expensive department store), so Linda\u2019s larceny is probably petty, second-, or third-degree theft under a consolidated theft statute.<\/li>\n<li>Ellen has committed <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny<\/strong> because she <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">took<\/strong> personal property belonging to another without consent and with what appears to be the intent to keep it permanently. When Ellen put her hand over the Rolex watch, she gained <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">control<\/strong> of it. When she slid it across the counter, this was sufficient <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">asportation<\/strong> of the property because asportation for larceny can generally be any distance\u2014no matter how slight. The Rolex is valued at ten thousand dollars, so Ellen\u2019s larceny is probably grand or first-degree theft under a consolidated theft statute.<\/li>\n<li>The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed, holding that the lease deposits were held in trust and belonged to the <em class=\"emphasis\">defendant<\/em>, not the lessees. The court also held that the prosecution failed to prove a relationship of <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">trust<\/strong> and <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">confidence<\/strong> between the defendant and the lessees, which is required in Minnesota for embezzlement theft under the consolidated theft statute.<\/li>\n<li>The Court of Appeal of California modified the defendant\u2019s conviction under a consolidated theft statute. The court held that the defendant actually committed attempted <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny by trick<\/strong>, not false pretenses, because he was directed to purchase licensing agreements with the money, which put him in <em class=\"emphasis\">possession<\/em> of it rather than <em class=\"emphasis\">ownership<\/em>.<\/li>\n<li>The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the defendant\u2019s conviction. The court held that the <em class=\"emphasis\">defendant<\/em> did not have to use the mails or intend that the mails be used by another to be convicted of federal mail fraud. However, because all the mailings involved the defendant\u2019s <em class=\"emphasis\">son<\/em>, who was acquitted of the arson and therefore not involved in a scheme to defraud the insurance company, the defendant\u2019s mail fraud conviction had no basis.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n08\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Exercises<\/h4>\n<p class=\"simpara\">From <a class=\"xref\" href=\"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/chapter\/11-2-extortion-robbery-and-receiving-stolen-property\/#storm_1.0-ch11_s02\">Section 11.2 &#8220;Extortion, Robbery, and Receiving Stolen Property&#8221;<\/a><\/p>\n<ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l07\">\n<li>Chuck has committed the crime of <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">attempted extortion<\/strong>. Although Chuck threatened to expose Jeremy\u2019s crime of false pretenses with the intent to force Jeremy to pay him two hundred dollars, Jeremy did <em class=\"emphasis\">not pay<\/em> Chuck. Thus the <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">harm<\/strong> element of extortion is lacking, and Chuck\u2019s conduct is only attempted extortion.<\/li>\n<li>The Court of Appeals of North Carolina reversed the defendant\u2019s robbery conviction because he <em class=\"emphasis\">snatched<\/em> the purse, using only the force required to take it from the victim\u2019s possession. Thus the crime was most likely <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">larceny<\/strong> rather than <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">robbery<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>The Court of Appeals of Michigan upheld the defendant\u2019s conviction. Although the court conceded that a theft by larceny requires the intent to <em class=\"emphasis\">permanently<\/em> deprive the owner of personal property, the court held that the term \u201cstolen\u201d in the receiving stolen property statute encompasses more than larceny theft, and thus it includes <em class=\"emphasis\">any taking<\/em> of personal property without permission of the owner.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n09\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Exercises<\/h4>\n<p class=\"simpara\">From <a class=\"xref\" href=\"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/chapter\/11-3-crimes-that-invade-or-damage-property\/#storm_1.0-ch11_s03\">Section 11.3 &#8220;Crimes That Invade or Damage Property&#8221;<\/a><\/p>\n<ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l08\">\n<li>Burglary of a <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">dwelling<\/strong> is graded higher than burglary of a structure or vehicle because it is likely that the owners of a dwelling might be inside and might employ protective actions that could lead to <em class=\"emphasis\">injury<\/em> or <em class=\"emphasis\">death<\/em>. Burglary at <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">nighttime<\/strong> enhances the probability that the dwelling owners will be home and makes it more difficult to identify the defendant. This could also enhance the probability of injury or death and reduce the chances of conviction, which does not serve <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">deterrence<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>The Court of Appeal of Florida held that the evidence was <em class=\"emphasis\">insufficient<\/em> to warrant the <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">necessity<\/strong> jury instruction. Although a neighbor to the burglarized residence testified that the defendant rang her doorbell and asked to come in while looking around in a scared manner, and a guest at a party testified that the defendant was slapped by an individual claiming the defendant owed him money, the court held that this evidence did not establish the defendant\u2019s reasonable belief that he was at risk for immediate serious bodily injury.<\/li>\n<li>The Court of Appeals of Texas dismissed the minor\u2019s judgment of adjudication because the middle school was not located in \u201cthe incorporated city limits,\u201d as was alleged in the State\u2019s petition for adjudication.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n10\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Answers to Law and Ethics Questions<\/h4>\n<ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l09\">\n<li>Whether it is ethical to publish classified information depends on the <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">content<\/strong> of the published material, and requires a balancing of the public\u2019s right to know and the safety risk posed by the publication. If the publication exposes government corruption or another topic that could lead to government reform <em class=\"emphasis\">and<\/em> the risk of harm is minimal, then many would feel the exposure is of high value and ethical.<\/li>\n<li>The First Amendment complicates the prosecution of WikiLeaks for simply publishing information provided by an informant. Without evidence that WikiLeaks <em class=\"emphasis\">participated<\/em> or <em class=\"emphasis\">assisted<\/em> the government informant, a prosecution of WikiLeaks is a prosecution for <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">speech<\/strong>, and this requires a compelling government interest and a narrowly tailored statute. Of course the government has a strong interest in protecting those involved in national defense; however, government speech has traditionally been accorded the <em class=\"emphasis\">highest<\/em> form of protection from censorship. An additional problem is the Constitution\u2019s prohibition against the enactment of <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">ex post facto<\/strong> laws because it does not appear that there is a statute addressing WikiLeaks\u2019 behavior (government property cannot be copyrighted, trademarked, or patented, so there was no intellectual property infringement).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"bcc-box bcc-highlight\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_n11\">\n<h4 class=\"title\">Answers to You Be the Legal Textbook Author<\/h4>\n<ol class=\"orderedlist\" id=\"storm_1.0-ch11_s04_l10\">\n<li>Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong>: access, disrupt, damage, destroy, take, injure, introduce computer contaminant to any computer, computer system, or network. Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>: general intent or knowingly. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Attendant circumstance<\/strong>: without authorization. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Harm<\/strong>: disruption, damage, destruction, or use of the computer to commit a scheme to defraud. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Grading<\/strong>: a felony or a first-degree misdemeanor. Also provides a civil action for damages.<\/li>\n<li>Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong>: possess or use the identifying information of another person. Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>: specific intent or purposely to further an unlawful purpose. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Attendant circumstance<\/strong>: lack of victim consent. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Harm<\/strong>: identifying information of another is possessed or used to further any unlawful purpose. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Grading<\/strong>: a felony or misdemeanor, depending on the value of property obtained, the prior record of the defendant, and whether the unlawful purpose is a conspiracy or dependent abuse.<\/li>\n<li>Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">act<\/strong>: copy, reproduce, or duplicate any computer data or program. Criminal <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">intent<\/strong>: general intent or knowingly to deprive the owner of property valued in excess of $2,500, <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">or<\/strong> specific intent or purposely to commit or attempt to commit any felony. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Attendant circumstance<\/strong>: with no right to do so. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Harm<\/strong>: computer data or program is copied, reproduced, or duplicated. <strong class=\"emphasis bold\">Grading<\/strong>: felony.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t <section class=\"citations-section\" role=\"contentinfo\">\n\t\t\t <h3>Candela Citations<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\t <div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t <div id=\"citation-list-1318\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <div class=\"licensing\"><div class=\"license-attribution-dropdown-subheading\">CC licensed content, Shared previously<\/div><ul class=\"citation-list\"><li>Criminal Law. <strong>Provided by<\/strong>: University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing . <strong>Located at<\/strong>: <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/open.lib.umn.edu\/criminallaw\/\">http:\/\/open.lib.umn.edu\/criminallaw\/<\/a>. <strong>License<\/strong>: <em><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"license\" href=\"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc-sa\/4.0\/\">CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike<\/a><\/em><\/li><\/ul><\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t <\/div>\n\t\t\t <\/section>","protected":false},"author":23485,"menu_order":4,"template":"","meta":{"_candela_citation":"[{\"type\":\"cc\",\"description\":\"Criminal Law\",\"author\":\"\",\"organization\":\"University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing \",\"url\":\"http:\/\/open.lib.umn.edu\/criminallaw\/\",\"project\":\"\",\"license\":\"cc-by-nc-sa\",\"license_terms\":\"\"}]","CANDELA_OUTCOMES_GUID":"","pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-1318","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":1305,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1318","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/23485"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1318\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1535,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1318\/revisions\/1535"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/1305"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1318\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1318"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=1318"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=1318"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-sccc-criminallaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=1318"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}