(a) A person is guilty of robbery in the first degree when the person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree and when, in the course of the commission of the crime or of immediate flight therefrom, the person or another participant in the crime:
(1) Causes physical injury to any person who is not a participant in the crime; or
(2) Displays what appears to be a deadly weapon or represents by word or conduct that the person is in possession or control of a deadly weapon; or
(3) Is armed with and uses or threatens the use of a dangerous instrument; or
(4) Commits said crime against a person who is 65 years of age or older; or
(5) Threatens death upon another.
Robbery in the first degree is a class B felony.
(b) Notwithstanding any provisions of this section or Code to the contrary, any person convicted of robbery in the first degree shall receive a minimum sentence of:
(1) Three years at Level V; or
(2) Five years at Level V, if the conviction was either of the following:
a. For an offense that was committed pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section and the deadly weapon was a firearm or projectile weapon, and within 7 years of the date of a previous conviction for robbery in the first degree or if the conviction is for an offense that was committed within 7 years of the date of termination of all periods of incarceration or confinement imposed pursuant to a previous conviction for robbery in the first degree, whichever is the later date.
b. For an offense committed within 2 years of the date of a previous conviction for robbery in the first degree or if the conviction is for an offense that was committed within 2 years of the date of termination of all periods of incarceration or confinement imposed pursuant to a previous conviction for robbery in the first degree, whichever is the later date.
(c) The sentencing provisions of this section apply to attempted robbery in the first degree as well as robbery in the first degree.
11 Del. C. 1953,
§
832;
58 Del. Laws, c. 497,
§
1;
59 Del. Laws, c. 547,
§
6;
60 Del. Laws, c. 240,
§§
1, 2;
63 Del. Laws, c. 329,
§
1;
67 Del. Laws, c. 130,
§§
8, 13;
68 Del. Laws, c. 129,
§
5;
70 Del. Laws, c. 186,
§
1;
73 Del. Laws, c. 126,
§
9;
74 Del. Laws, c. 93,
§
1;
74 Del. Laws, c. 106,
§
6;
74 Del. Laws, c. 345,
§
6;
80 Del. Laws, c. 358,
§
1;
82 Del. Laws, c. 216,
§
1;
84 Del. Laws, c. 514,
§
16;
84 Del. Laws, c. 525,
§
3;
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Nylere Stanford (2023)
ca3 · cites it 3×
“The instructions confirm that 11 Del. C. § 832(a) is divisible: the jury must find the relevant alternative element beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Smallwood (1975)
del · cites it 2×
“I In a jury trial defendant was convicted of robbery in the first degree, 11 Del.C. § 832(2), under circumstances which, for present purposes, are not in dispute.”
State v. Bridgers (2007)
delsuperct
“11 Del. C. § 832 (2006). 6 . 11 Del. C. § 831 (2006).”
Bailey v. State (1984)
del
“) 11 Del.C. § 832 reads as follows: § 832. Robbery in the first degree.”
DeShields v. Snyder (1993)
ded
“§ 636; robbery in the first degree in violation of 11 Del.C. § 832(a)(2); and possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felony in violation of 11 Del.”
Anderson v. Redman (1977)
ded
“§ 832 (1974) — 10 year mandatory minimum sentence for a second robbery conviction coupled with a prohibition against concurrent sentences arising out of the same incident and a 3 year mandatory minimum sentence for a first robbery offense; 11 Del.C. § 4209 (1974) — held to…”
Flamer v. Chaffinch (1993)
ded
“At the same trial, Flamer was also convicted and separately sentenced for robbery (11 Del.C. § 832(a)(1)). Flamer contends that to be convicted and sentenced both for robbery and for felony murder with the predicate offense being the same robbery violates the Double Jeopardy…”
Jones v. Carroll (2005)
ded
“The current version of 11 Del. C. Ann. § 832(a)(2)(2003) includes the following additional language: "or represents by word or conduct that the person is in possession or control of a deadly weapon.”
Watson v. State (1975)
del
“The defendant appeals his conviction of first degree robbery [11 Del.C. § 832(2)] on the ground that his in-court identification by the victim was fatally tainted by evidence of an unnecessarily suggestive out-of-court confrontation and identification.”
Barnes v. State (1976)
del
“§ 636(1)] and robbery in the first degree [11 Del.C. § 832(1)]. He appeals on several grounds including the admission in evidence of the victim’s before-death declarations and the Trial Judge’s instruction as to accomplice liability.”
State v. Soloman (2020)
delsuperct · cites it 4×
“3 The first 3 years of this sentence are mandatory pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 832(a). V, suspended after 3 years, for 2 year at supervision Level III; 4 for Robbery First Degree – IN11-10-0356, 10 years at Level V, suspended after 3 years, for 2 years at supervision Level III;5…”
State v. McFarland (2020)
delsuperct · cites it 3×
“3 The first 3 years of this sentence is a mandatory term of incarceration pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 832. First Degree, IN14-11-0552, 10 years at Level 5, suspended after 3 years and 6 months for 18 months at supervision Level III;4 for Burglary Second Degree, IN14- 09-1125, 8…”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(1) — 1 case
Barnes v. State (1976)
del
“§ 636(1)] and robbery in the first degree [11 Del.C. § 832(1)]. He appeals on several grounds including the admission in evidence of the victim’s before-death declarations and the Trial Judge’s instruction as to accomplice liability.”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(2) — 2 cases
State v. Smallwood (1975)
del
“I In a jury trial defendant was convicted of robbery in the first degree, 11 Del.C. § 832(2), under circumstances which, for present purposes, are not in dispute.”
Watson v. State (1975)
del
“The defendant appeals his conviction of first degree robbery [11 Del.C. § 832(2)] on the ground that his in-court identification by the victim was fatally tainted by evidence of an unnecessarily suggestive out-of-court confrontation and identification.”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(A) — 1 case
— 11 Del. C. § 832(a) — 12 cases
United States v. Nylere Stanford (2023)
ca3
“The instructions confirm that 11 Del. C. § 832(a) is divisible: the jury must find the relevant alternative element beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Soloman (2020)
delsuperct
“3 The first 3 years of this sentence are mandatory pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 832(a). V, suspended after 3 years, for 2 year at supervision Level III; 4 for Robbery First Degree – IN11-10-0356, 10 years at Level V, suspended after 3 years, for 2 years at supervision Level III;5…”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(a)(1) — 2 cases
Flamer v. Chaffinch (1993)
ded
“At the same trial, Flamer was also convicted and separately sentenced for robbery (11 Del.C. § 832(a)(1)). Flamer contends that to be convicted and sentenced both for robbery and for felony murder with the predicate offense being the same robbery violates the Double Jeopardy…”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(a)(2) — 5 cases
DeShields v. Snyder (1993)
ded
“§ 636; robbery in the first degree in violation of 11 Del.C. § 832(a)(2); and possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felony in violation of 11 Del.”
United States v. Nylere Stanford (2023)
ca3
“The instructions confirm that 11 Del. C. § 832(a) is divisible: the jury must find the relevant alternative element beyond a reasonable doubt.”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(a)(2)(2003) — 1 case
Jones v. Carroll (2005)
ded
“The current version of 11 Del. C. Ann. § 832(a)(2)(2003) includes the following additional language: "or represents by word or conduct that the person is in possession or control of a deadly weapon.”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(a)(4) — 2 cases
United States v. Nylere Stanford (2023)
ca3
“The instructions confirm that 11 Del. C. § 832(a) is divisible: the jury must find the relevant alternative element beyond a reasonable doubt.”
— 11 Del. C. § 832(b)(1) — 2 cases
— 11 Del. C. § 832(c) — 1 case
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.