Also known as:larceny by trick · larceny by device · theft by trick · larceny by deception
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A common-law form of larceny that occurs when a defendant obtains possession or custody of another's property by fraudulently inducing the victim's consent. The law treats consent secured by misrepresentation as invalid, rendering the taking trespassory.
See Our Sources
How its tested
Common Examples
2
Stagehand Deceives Guard for Guitar
Rebecca approached security guard Wade at the concert venue and falsely claimed she had been authorized to remove instruments for setup. Wade unlocked the equipment room in reliance on that statement. Rebecca then placed the custom guitar belonging to musician Jackson into her car trunk. Because Wade's consent rested on the misrepresentation, the law treats the taking as trespassory and establishes larceny by trick.
Crew Diverts Cargo Through False Story
Mary, a crew member on Apex Shipping's vessel, diverted containers of electronics to a private dock by altering manifests. Everett accepted the crates after Mary misrepresented the diversion as authorized short-shipment. Everett later stored the goods and arranged resale. The initial transfer of possession rested on the misrepresentation, satisfying the elements of larceny by trick rather than a later conversion.
Morrissette v. United States342 U.S. 246, 72 S.Ct. 240, 96 L.Ed. 288.
In December 1948, Morissette went hunting on a large tract of land in Michigan that the Government had used as a practice bombing range for the Air Force. Spent bomb casings from the range had been dumped into heaps and left exposed to the weather for four years or more. Morissette collected three tons of the casings, flattened them at a nearby farm, and sold them for eighty-four dollars.
Morissette worked as a fruit stand operator in the summer and as a trucker and scrap iron collector in the winter. He was an honorably discharged veteran of World War II who had a good reputation among his neighbors. He loaded the casings onto his truck and transported them in broad daylight without any effort to conceal what he was doing.
When authorities began an investigation, Morissette voluntarily and candidly told them the whole story, explaining that he believed the casings were abandoned and that he had no intention of stealing them. He was indicted for unlawfully, willfully, and knowingly stealing and converting property of the United States valued at eighty-four dollars in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641.
At trial, the District Court refused to permit Morissette to show that he thought the property was abandoned or to argue that he lacked criminal intent. The court instructed the jury that if it believed the government testimony, Morissette was guilty, and the jury convicted him. The court sentenced him to two months in prison or a fine of two hundred dollars.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
How does misrepresentation affect the trespassory element of larceny?
When a defendant secures the victim's consent to transfer possession through deliberate misrepresentation, the law treats that consent as invalid. The taking therefore remains trespassory and constitutes larceny by trick.
Supporting sources
What distinguishes larceny by trick from false pretenses?
Larceny by trick requires that the victim intend to convey only possession or custody. False pretenses requires that the victim intend to convey title. Courts look to the interest the victim meant to transfer.
Supporting sources
Does larceny by trick require the defendant to obtain both title and possession?
No. The offense is complete when the defendant obtains only possession or custody through the fraudulent inducement of consent. Acquisition of title points instead to false pretenses.
Supporting sources
342 U.S. 246, 72 S.Ct. 240, 96 L.Ed. 288.
…twelve hundred and ninety of the penal law, was denominated a larceny, to wit: common law larceny by asportation, common law larceny by trick and device, obtaining property by false pretenses, and embezzlement.” : Cf. Morgan, Instructing the Jury Upon Presumptions and Burden of Proof, 47 Harv. L. Rev. 59; Morgan, Some Observations…
Criminal Law Constitutional ProtectionsStatutory crimes · TheftNEXTGENFoundational