Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 17
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17, § 2101 (2026)

Definition of larceny

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1971, c. 36 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 499, §11 (RP).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1971–1980 · leading case: State v. Thibodeau, 353 A.2d 595 (Me. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Thibodeau, 353 A.2d 595 (Me. 1976). “This is so, even though neither the statute defining larceny, 17 M.R.S.A. § 2101, nor the reference statute prohibiting breaking and entering, expressly mentions any specific intent.”
State v. St. Clair, 418 A.2d 184 (Me. 1980). “00”, as in the indictment in the case at bar, identifies the crime as “grand larceny” for purposes of punishment under 17 M.R.S.A. § 2101, amended P.L. 1971, c.”
State v. McKeough, 300 A.2d 755 (Me. 1973). “It is well settled that an intent to deprive permanently the owner of his property is an essential element of the crime of larceny 4 and also, of course, of robbery which is larceny committed by violence or by putting in fear, although neither statute makes specific mention of…”
State v. Toppi, 275 A.2d 805 (Me. 1971). “00, in violation of 17 M.R.S.A. section 2101. APPENDIX B PARTICULARS 1.”
State v. Bey, 342 A.2d 292 (Me. 1975). · cites it 2× “One page earlier in the record the instructions include a verbatim reading of pertinent parts of the larceny statute (17 M.R.S.A. § 2101), and, on the page from which the defendant abstracts the alleged error and on subsequent pages, the presiding Justice gives a correct…”
State v. Boutot, 325 A.2d 34 (Me. 1974). “For the present purposes we do not distinguish between larceny (17 M.R.S.A. § 2101) and the offense of using a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent (29 M.”
State v. Collamore, 287 A.2d 123 (Me. 1972). “(17 M.R.S.A. § 2101.) The jury found the Defendants guilty of grand larceny under proper instructions.”
State v. DeMatteo, 308 A.2d 579 (Me. 1973). “(17 M.R.S.A. § 2101.) Although many points of appeal were originally assigned, an amendment to the points of appeal limited the issues.”
Shaw v. Robbins, 338 F. Supp. 756 (D. Me. 1972). “Cellamare are both presently confined in the Maine State Prison at Thomaston, Maine serving sentences imposed by the Cumberland County, Maine Superior Court upon their conviction, together with one Toppi, following jury trial, of the crime of conspiracy to commit larceny (17…”
State v. Riccatelli, 358 A.2d 542 (Me. 1976). “17 M.R.S.A. § 2101. . The Superior Court docket entries contain no indication that the defendant’s plea of guilty to the amended indictment was in any way conditional.”
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.