http://www.oyez.org/issues/criminal-procedure/bank-robbery/ U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en-us <p>May defendants charged with federal bank robbery have the jury consider whether they committed the lesser crime of federal bank larceny?</p><p>No. In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court held that federal bank larceny is not a "lesser included offense" of federal bank robbery. The "[p]etitioner is accordingly prohibited as a matter of law from obtaining a lesser included offense instruction," wrote Justice Thomas for the Court. Justice Thomas concluded that the larceny law requires proof of three elements not included in robbery: the intent to steal, property worth more than $ 1,000, and proof that the defendant "takes and carries away" the property. Dissenting, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Stephen G. Breyer, expressed the view that the Court's decision gave "short shrift to the common-law origin and statutory evolution of [18 USC Section 2113]."</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1999/1999_99_5716/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1958/1958_137/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1956/1956_132/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_76_5796/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1975/1975_74_1141/