Also known as: intention to steal · intent to permanently deprive · animus furandi
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The culpable mental state consisting of a purpose to permanently deprive another of property. This specific intent must exist at the moment of the taking and distinguishes larceny and related theft offenses from mere trespass or temporary misappropriation.
Ingrid Innes grabs a purse from Isla Ireland on a sidewalk and flees. The force overcomes Isla's resistance and Ingrid's actions show she means to keep the contents permanently rather than return them. The intent to steal completes the robbery elements.
Ian Iverson accepts electronics from a thief who hid them in a warehouse bay Ian controls. Ian knows the items were stolen and plans to resell them for his own profit without returning them to the owner. The intent to steal satisfies the receipt offense.
Igor Ito collects spent casings from a former bombing range and sells them as scrap. He asserts he believed the government had abandoned the property and therefore lacked any purpose to keep it from its owner. The intent to steal question turns on whether his belief negated the required mental state.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Imran Iyer pushes a victim aside to seize a wallet and runs away without returning it. The shove occurs solely to accomplish the taking and the subsequent flight shows a purpose to keep the property permanently. The intent to steal supplies the mental element even without separate intent to cause fear.
Idris Ives enters a lab intending to steal laptops and ties a student inside before fleeing a fire. The specific purpose to take and keep the equipment permanently supplies the mental state that elevates the resulting death under felony murder. The intent to steal is therefore the predicate for the murder charge.
Isla Ireland faces life without parole after repeated nonviolent theft convictions involving small items. The underlying intent to steal in each offense is weighed against the sentence length to determine whether the punishment is grossly disproportionate. The mental state remains the same across the predicate crimes.
Yes. The mental state must coincide with the caption and asportation. A later-formed purpose to keep the property does not satisfy the element unless a continuing-trespass doctrine applies.
Supporting sources
It can if the evidence shows the defendant genuinely planned prompt return at the moment of taking. Courts examine surrounding conduct such as furtive removal or price-tag removal to test whether the stated temporary purpose is credible.
Supporting sources
Both require an intent to permanently deprive, but embezzlement presupposes initial lawful possession followed by conversion, whereas larceny requires a trespassory taking from the outset.
Supporting sources
Yes. When death occurs during commission of a theft felony, the purpose to permanently deprive supplies the malice element even without an actual intent to kill or cause serious injury.
Supporting sources
…the federal statute (18 USCA § 82) adopting common-law terms, stealing in general imports larceny; that is, felonious taking and intent to permanently deprive the owner of his property.” 1 F. Supp. at 660. 18 U. S. C. (1940 ed.) § 87, entitled “Embezzling arms and stores,” provides: “Whoever shall steal, embezzle, or knowingly apply…