One Unbroken Chain of Events: The Doctrine of Continuous Transaction in State v. Jackson

Robbery is larceny from the person by violence or intimidation.  The exact relationship between the taking and the violence is vexing.  There is authority for the proposition that the use of force must be such as to induce the victim to part with the property.  State v. Richardson, 308 N.C. 470, 476, 302 S.E.2d 799, 803 (1983).  A recent opinion of the Court of Appeals reminds us, however, that the violence need not coincide with the taking when there is a continuous transaction.  See State v. Jackson, No. COA23-636, 2024 WL 1172327 (N.C. Ct. App. Mar. 19, 2024).  In such cases, the evidence may support a conviction for robbery, even if the victim is incapacitated, unconscious, or dead.  This post explores the doctrine of continuous transaction. A. Armed Robbery “Robbery, a common law offense not defined by statute in North Carolina, is an aggravated form of larceny.”  State v. Bond, 345 N.C. 1, 22, 478 S.E.2d 163, 174 (1996).  The elements of common law robbery are the felonious, non-consensual taking of money or personal property from the person or presence of another by means of violence or fear.  State v. Bell, 359 N.C. 1, 37, 603 S.E.2d 93, 117 (2004).  Since all larceny was felony at common law, the word “felonious” here means a taking with intent to steal.  Rollin M. Perkins & Ronald N. Boyce, Criminal Law 343 (3rd ed. 1982); cf. N.C.G.S. § 14-70 (except as provided, larceny is a felony).  The phrase “or presence” is superfluous, as that [...]