State v. Bland

457 S.E.2d 611, 318 S.C. 315, 1995 S.C. LEXIS 73
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedMay 1, 1995
Docket24238
StatusPublished
Cited by25 cases

This text of 457 S.E.2d 611 (State v. Bland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Bland, 457 S.E.2d 611, 318 S.C. 315, 1995 S.C. LEXIS 73 (S.C. 1995).

Opinion

Toal, Justice:

We granted certiorari to review the opinion of the Court of Appeals in State v. Bland, Op. No. 93-UP-347 (Ct. App. filed December 29,1993). We affirm.

FACTS

Calvin Arno Bland approached a woman walking to her car in a grocery store parking lot." He grabbed her purse and pulled it twice. As she turned toward him the purse fell from her shoulder and came over her arm and hand. Bland then flung the woman to the ground and fled with the purse.

*317 Thereafter, Bland was tried for assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature and robbery. At trial, the trial judge denied Bland’s request of a jury instruction on the statutory offense of purse snatching, S.C. Code Ann. § 16-13-150 (1985). Bland was convicted of both charges. Bland appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed in a memorandum opinion. State v. Bland, Op. No. 93-UP-347 (Ct. App. filed December 29,1993). This Court granted certiorari.

LAW/ANALYSIS

Bland contends the Court of Appeals erred in holding purse snatching was not a lesser-included offense of robbery. We disagree.

The test for determining when a crime is a lesser in-eluded offense of the crime charged is whether the greater of the two offenses includes all the elements of the lesser offense. State v. Sutiles, 279 S.C. 87, 302 S.E. (2d) 338 (1983). If the lesser offense includes an element not included in the greater offense, then the lesser offense is not included in the greater. State v. Fennel, 263 S.C. 216, 209 S.E. (2d) 433 (1974).

Robbery is defined as the felonious or unlawful taking of money, goods or other personal property of any value from the person of another or in his presence by violence or by putting such person in fear. State v. Drayton, 293 S.C. 417, 361 S.E. (2d) 329 (1987). Purse snatching is defined as the following:

Any person who shall snatch suddenly and carry away from the person of another a purse or other thing of value with intent to deprive the owner or person lawfully in possession of such article in circumstances not constituting grand larceny, robbery, or privily stealing from the person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years.

S.C. Code Ann. § 16-13-150 (1985) (emphasis added).

These two crimes do not contain the same elements. One element of section 16-3-150, “snatch[ing] suddenly” a thing of value, is not an element of the robbery. Another element of section 16-13-150, “circumstances not constituting .... robbery. Because robbery does not in- *318 elude all the elements of purse snatching, the Court of Appeals properly held purse snatching is not a lesser included offense of robbery. Fennel, supra.

Affirmed.

Finney, C.J., Toal and Waller, JJ., and A. Lee Chandler, Acting Associate Justice, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Kevin Herriott
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2024
State v. Brandenburg
797 S.E.2d 416 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2017)
State v. Sosebee
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2013
State v. Cobb
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2013
State v. Gilliland
741 S.E.2d 521 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2012)
State v. Reid
679 S.E.2d 194 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2009)
State v. Thompson
647 S.E.2d 702 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2007)
State v. Chancy
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2004
State v. Arthur
593 S.E.2d 522 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2004)
State v. Sumpter
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2003
Broom v. State
569 S.E.2d 336 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2002)
State v. LaCoste
553 S.E.2d 464 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2002)
State v. Rosemond
560 S.E.2d 636 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2002)
State v. Bullard
560 S.E.2d 436 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2002)
State v. Parker
543 S.E.2d 255 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2001)
State v. Green
539 S.E.2d 419 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2000)
State v. McFadden
539 S.E.2d 387 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2000)
State v. Brock
516 S.E.2d 212 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1999)
Hope v. State
492 S.E.2d 76 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1997)
State v. Kirby
481 S.E.2d 150 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
457 S.E.2d 611, 318 S.C. 315, 1995 S.C. LEXIS 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bland-sc-1995.