ipl-logo

Compare And Contrast Croaker V. Clarke

386 Words2 Pages

FACTS: The defendant (Lake) encountered Clarke sitting on the beach and he demanded Clarke’s white car keys for several times. But, when Clarke refused, Lake pulled out a gun and walked Clarke out to the water. At that time, Clarke saw his friend (Croaker) and he called out to warn her. Thereafter, Lake saw her and demanded her car’s keys. When she refused, he held the gun to Croaker’s head and she gave him the keys. After Clarke struggled to get out of the water, Croaker and Clarke followed lake to the parking area, Lake was driving away. Therefore, Lake was convicted under the statute of using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, namely, a carjacking.
ISSUE: Whether or not the defendant violates the carjacking statutes?
Rule: The carjacking statute requires that the vehicle must be taken "from the person or presence" of the victim/owner. …show more content…

Under the 18 U.S.C sec. 2111, 2113, and 2118 statute, property in the presence of its owner will retain his possession. Which represents observation, reach, control or touch the property. However, Lake argued that he didn’t took the car with her presence, which means that she could not see or touch the car. But he took the keys in her presence. At this point, Clarke and Croaker states that they both were scared that Lake would shoot them or to cause a harm. Therefore, the rational jury responded to that by that Croaker could have the ability to prevent the defendant from taking her car if she had not been frightened that Lake will shoot or harm

Open Document