(a) A person is guilty of robbery in the second degree when, in the course of committing theft, the person uses or threatens the immediate use of force upon another person with intent to:
(1) Prevent or overcome resistance to the taking of the property or to the retention thereof immediately after the taking; or
(2) Compel the owner of the property or another person to deliver up the property or to engage in other conduct which aids in the commission of the theft.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, robbery second degree is a class E felony.
(c) In addition to its ordinary meaning, the phrase “in the course of committing theft” includes any act which occurs in an attempt to commit theft or in immediate flight after the attempt or commission of the theft.
(d) Robbery in the second degree is a class D felony when, in the course of committing an offense under subsection (a) of this section, the person takes possession of a motor vehicle, and while in possession or control of such vehicle, the person does any of the following:
(1) Commits or attempts to commit a class D or greater felony.
(2) Drives or operates the vehicle in violation of § 4177 of Title 21.
(3) Commits any offense set forth in Chapter 47 of Title 16.
(4) Engages in conduct which causes or creates a substantial risk of physical injury to another person.
(e) Definitions relating to subsection (d) of this section. —
(1) “Another person” means and includes the owner of the motor vehicle or any operator, occupant, passenger of the motor vehicle or any other person who has an interest in the use of the motor vehicle which the offender is not privileged to infringe.
(2) “Motor vehicle” or “vehicle,” means its ordinary meaning and includes any watercraft.
11 Del. C. 1953,
§
831;
58 Del. Laws, c. 497,
§
1;
65 Del. Laws, c. 517,
§
1;
67 Del. Laws, c. 130,
§
8;
68 Del. Laws, c. 129,
§
4;
70 Del. Laws, c. 186,
§
1;
71 Del. Laws, c. 47,
§
1;
82 Del. Laws, c. 216,
§
1;
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Nylere Stanford (2023)
ca3 · cites it 4×
“B Because 11 Del. C. §§ 831(a) and 832(a) are divisible, we normally would apply the modified categorical approach, consulting Stanford’s Shepard documents to discern his statutory offenses.”
United States v. Darron Henderson (2023)
ca3
“July 28, 2023) (holding that Delaware robbery, 11 Del. C. § 831(a), qualifies as a crime of violence under the elements clause because it “requires the intentional use or threatened use of immediate force ‘upon another person,’” and thus involves force that is “consciously…”
Stigars v. State (1996)
del
“Additionally, the part of the 1973 commentary that addresses the robbery statute, 11 Del.C. § 831, defines robbery as “forcible theft” and expresses the drafters’ intention that the theft involved in the commission of a robbery not be punished separately from the robbery.”
State v. Bridgers (2007)
delsuperct
“…. 11 Del. C. § 831 (2006). 7 . 836 A.2d 485 (Del.2003) (Court”
State v. Smallwood (1975)
del
“Thereafter the Trial Judge, sua sponte, reduced the conviction to robbery in the second degree, 11 Del.C. § 831, because the victims did not actually see a weapon in the possession of defendant or a co-participant.”
Harris v. State (1975)
del
“0" encoding="utf-8"?> HERRMANN, Chief Justice: Defendant appeals his conviction of second degree robbery (11 Del.C. § 831) and felonious theft (11 Del.”
Jones v. Carroll (2005)
ded
“Second degree robbery is defined in 11 Del. C. Ann. § 831 (1999) as follows: (a) A person is guilty of robbery in the second degree when, in the course of committing theft, the person uses or threatens the immediate use of force upon another person with intent to: (1) Prevent or…”
Simpson v. State (1971)
del
“0" encoding="utf-8"?> WOLCOTT, Chief Justice: This is an appeal from a conviction of sodomy in violation of 11 Del.C. § 831. Prior to trial the accused filed a motion for a bifurcated trial; that is, a trial by jury as to the question of guilt and a second trial in the event of…”
Elam v. Caroll (2005)
ded
“On December 9, 1999, a Delaware Superior Court jury convicted petitioner of second degree robbery (11 Del. C. Ann. § 831). Petitioner was declared an habitual offender, and in February 2000, the Superior Court sentenced him to 15 years incarceration at Level V.”
Scott v. State (2019)
del · cites it 3×
“9 11 Del. C. § 831. 5 as part of the course of events occurring during the attempted theft is sufficient for a reasonable jury to infer that the force was used in connection with, or while attempting to flee from, the attempted theft.”
State v. Hall (2023)
delsuperct · cites it 2×
“Hall pled guilty to two counts of Robbery in the Second Degree, 11 Del. C. § 831, as lesser included offenses of Robbery in the First Degree, and one count of Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony, 11 Del C.”
State v. Hall (2023)
delsuperct · cites it 2×
“Hall pled guilty to two counts of Robbery in the Second Degree, 11 Del. C. § 831, as lesser included offenses of Robbery in the First Degree, and one count of Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony, 11 Del C.”
— 11 Del. C. § 831(a) — 9 cases
United States v. Nylere Stanford (2023)
ca3
“B Because 11 Del. C. §§ 831(a) and 832(a) are divisible, we normally would apply the modified categorical approach, consulting Stanford’s Shepard documents to discern his statutory offenses.”
United States v. Darron Henderson (2023)
ca3
“July 28, 2023) (holding that Delaware robbery, 11 Del. C. § 831(a), qualifies as a crime of violence under the elements clause because it “requires the intentional use or threatened use of immediate force ‘upon another person,’” and thus involves force that is “consciously…”
Scott v. State (2019)
del
“9 11 Del. C. § 831. 5 as part of the course of events occurring during the attempted theft is sufficient for a reasonable jury to infer that the force was used in connection with, or while attempting to flee from, the attempted theft.”
— 11 Del. C. § 831(a)(1) — 1 case
United States v. Nylere Stanford (2023)
ca3
“B Because 11 Del. C. §§ 831(a) and 832(a) are divisible, we normally would apply the modified categorical approach, consulting Stanford’s Shepard documents to discern his statutory offenses.”
— 11 Del. C. § 831(a)(2) — 1 case
— 11 Del. C. § 831(b) — 1 case
Scott v. State (2019)
del
“9 11 Del. C. § 831. 5 as part of the course of events occurring during the attempted theft is sufficient for a reasonable jury to infer that the force was used in connection with, or while attempting to flee from, the attempted theft.”
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.