Facts
- Ernest Stewart approached Marvin Luedtke, a service-station operator, and brandished a loaded .32 caliber pistol.
- Stewart demanded money, stating, “I want all of your money.”
- Luedtke indicated money was in a cash box near the fuel pumps; Stewart also demanded and received the contents of Luedtke’s wallet.
- Two police officers drove into the station; one officer saw the pistol in Stewart’s hand.
- Stewart told Luedtke to bring two cans of oil and to act as though Stewart were purchasing them.
- Stewart placed the pistol in a desk drawer, attempted to leave, and was immediately apprehended.
- At trial, Stewart was convicted by a jury of attempted robbery.
- On appeal, Stewart challenged only the sufficiency of the evidence, arguing he abandoned any intent to rob when police arrived.
Issues
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for attempted robbery where the defendant claimed he abandoned the crime after seeing police.
Decision
- The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.
- The court held the attempted robbery was complete when Stewart produced the pistol and demanded money.
- Stewart’s later conduct in putting the gun away and attempting to leave after police arrived did not negate liability for attempt.
Legal Principles
- A criminal attempt is established when the defendant forms the intent to commit the offense and commits an overt act toward its commission.
- Attempted robbery is complete when the defendant, intending to rob, brandishes a weapon and demands money; interruption before completion does not reduce liability.
- Once intent and overt acts exist, abandonment—whether prompted by approaching persons, police intervention, or a later change of mind—is not a defense to attempt.
Conclusion
The court affirmed Stewart’s attempted robbery conviction because the evidence showed intent to rob and overt acts completing the attempt; any later withdrawal after police arrived did not erase criminal liability.