(a) A person is guilty of robbery in the third degree when he commits robbery as defined in section
53a-133.
(b) Robbery in the third degree is a class D felony.
(1969, P.A. 828, S. 138; P.A. 92-260, S. 60.)
History: P.A. 92-260 amended Subsec. (a) to add “as defined in section 53a-133”.
Cited. 169 C. 247; 171 C. 105; 181 C. 388; 185 C. 260; 188 C. 591; 190 C. 428; 192 C. 618; 197 C. 314; 198 C. 285; 199 C. 557; 202 C. 224; 205 C. 61; 209 C. 23; 210 C. 435; 218 C. 432; 219 C. 160; 239 C. 235. Rational basis exists for legislature to classify larceny from the person as a more serious offense than simple robbery and therefore the classification did not violate defendant's right to equal protection of the laws. 246 C. 132.
Cited. 5 CA 500; 7 CA 27; 8 CA 454; Id., 620; 13 CA 420; Id., 596; 14 CA 205; 16 CA 318; Id., 433; 17 CA 226; 19 CA 423; 20 CA 513; Id., 643; 21 CA 248; Id., 291; 22 CA 216; 24 CA 316; Id., 518; 26 CA 114; 27 CA 780; 35 CA 839; 39 CA 579; Id., 810; 40 CA 250; 44 CA 307; 46 CA 616; Id., 778.
Subsec. (a):
Cited. 185 C. 402; 201 C. 125; Id., 559; 211 C. 101; 220 C. 487; 242 C. 523.
Cited. 8 CA 35; 10 CA 330; 14 CA 493; 35 CA 201; 38 CA 531; 41 CA 255; Id., 584. Jury could reasonably find that defendant's threat was part of the same continuous transaction as the larceny; use or threatened use of a firearm is not an element of the crime. 100 CA 122.
Cited. 33 CS 599; 37 CS 520.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
126
cases (
9 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case:
State v. Tinsley, 435 A.2d 1002 (Conn. 1980).
State v. Tinsley, 435 A.2d 1002 (Conn. 1980).
· cites it 8× “The defendant claims that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on robbery in the third degree; General Statutes § 53a-136; [4] and larceny in the fourth degree; General Statutes § 53a-125; [5] as lesser included offenses of first degree robbery.”
State v. Cobb, 743 A.2d 1 (Conn. 1999).
· cites it 5× “The defendant, Sedrick Cobb, appeals 1 from the judgment of the trial court, after a trial to a three judge court, of conviction of two counts of capital felony in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54b (5) and *297 (7), 2 and one count of robbery in the third degree in…”
State v. Binet, 473 A.2d 1200 (Conn. 1984).
· cites it 6× “After a voir dire sought by the state, and not the defendant, the court again denied the motion but ruled that the prior conviction would be admitted “for [the] purpose of impeachment only” and that the state would be “limited .”
State v. Pappas, 776 A.2d 1091 (Conn. 2001).
· cites it 4× “After a jury trial, the defendant, Stephen Pappas, was convicted of robbery in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-136 (a), 1 and larceny in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-123 (a) (2).”
State v. Hardy, 896 A.2d 755 (Conn. 2006).
· cites it 8× “In response, the state claims: (1) the Appellate Court properly concluded that the air pistol was a weapon from which a shot may be discharged within the meaning of § 53a~3 (6); and (2) in the alternative, even if we find that the trial court improperly concluded that deadly…”
State v. Wright, 716 A.2d 870 (Conn. 1998).
· cites it 6× “rtified appeal is whether the legislative classifications of larceny in the second degree by the taking of property from the person of another in violation of General Statutes § 53a-123 (a) (3) 1 (larceny from the person) as a class C felony, and *134 robbery in the third degree…”
State v. Tillman, 600 A.2d 738 (Conn. 1991).
· cites it 4× “The state charged the defendant with kidnapping in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-92 (a) (2) (B), sexual assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-70 (a), robbery in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-136…”
Bowden v. Comm'r of Corr., 888 A.2d 1131 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006).
· cites it 4× “1 Under that docket number, the petitioner was charged with two counts of robbery in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-136 (a), two counts of larceny in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-123 (a) (3), assault in the second degree of a…”
State v. Crumpton, 520 A.2d 226 (Conn. 1987).
· cites it 4× “The defendant, Gregory Crumpton, was convicted by a jury of robbery in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-136. 1 He was sentenced to imprisonment for a total effective sentence of five years, execution suspended after four years.”
State v. Coleman, 700 A.2d 14 (Conn. 1997).
· cites it 4× “ssault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-70 (a) (l), 1 burglary in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-101 (a) (2), 2 burglary in the second degree in violation *526 of General Statutes § 53a-102, 3 unlawful restraint in the first…”
State v. Nicholson, 803 A.2d 391 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 4× “Although we reverse the conviction of robbery in the first degree because the evidence was insufficient on the element of the “use or threatened the use of a dangerous instrument,” we conclude that the jury necessarily would have found the defendant guilty of the lesser charge…”
State v. Osman, 589 A.2d 1227 (Conn. 1991).
· cites it 4× “The Appellate Court consequently remanded the case to the trial court with direction to set aside the judgment of guilty of robbery in the first degree on the first count and to render a judgment of guilty of robbery in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-136…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-136(a) — 2 cases
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.