Any person to whom any money or other property of another shall be entrusted or delivered
for a particular purpose, who shall intentionally appropriate to his or her own use
that money or property, shall be deemed guilty of unlawful appropriation and shall
be fined not more than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) or three (3) times the value
of the money or property thus appropriated, whichever is greater, or imprisoned not
more than twenty (20) years, or both. However, if the sum or value of the property
so appropriated is less than one thousand dollars ($1,000), he or she shall be fined
not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) or imprisoned for not more than one year,
or both.
Notes of Decisions
Michael J. Salvatore v. Thomas A. Palangio, 247 A.3d 1250 (R.I. 2021).
· cites it 2× “The amended complaint contains the following counts: promissory estoppel (Count One); fraud in the inducement (Count Two); intentional misrepresentation (Count Three); unjust enrichment (Count Four); unlawful appropriation in violation of G.L. 1956 § 11-41-11.1 (Count Five);…”
State v. Geoffrey A. Regan, 273 A.3d 116 (R.I. 2022).
· cites it 2× “Facts and Travel In January 2011, a judgment of conviction entered following defendant’s plea of nolo contendere to the charge of unlawful appropriation in an amount greater than $1,000, in violation of G.L. 1956 § 11-41-11.1. He was sentenced to 1 The defendant, who is a…”
State v. Lydia Alicea, No. 2023-0043-C.A (R.I. July 1, 2024).
“In Regan, the defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere to violating § 11-41-11.1, “unlawful appropriation in an amount greater than $1,000,” a larceny crime.”
In the Matter of McDonald, 721 A.2d 97 (R.I. 1998).
· cites it 2× “G.L. § 11-41-11.1. He has been sentenced to a three (3) year period of probation on each count, sentence to be served concurrently, and has been ordered to make restitution.”
State v. Judith Rosenbaum, 114 A.3d 76 (R.I. 2015).
“1956 § 11-41-11.1 (count 5); and one count of obtaining goods valued at more than $500 by false pretenses with intent to cheat or defraud, in violation of § 11-41-4 and § 11-41-5 (count 6).”
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.