FACTS: Sam Kant, stands convicted of shoplifting/petit larceny (as dictated by y
ID: 466479 • Letter: F
Question
FACTS: Sam Kant, stands convicted of shoplifting/petit larceny (as dictated by your state statutes) from Bilmart, a national department store. At his wife’s request, Mr. Kant went to Bilmart on Wednesday, ______, 20___, and purchased a case of six 4 oz. cans of Hoover’s Baked Beans with Bacon. Upon returning home, his wife chastised him for once again failing to purchase what she had requested. Apparently, Mrs. Kant can’t stand the taste of Hoover’s Beans, but is very fond of the Handell’s brand, and was planning to serve them to her book club when she hosted them for lunch the following afternoon. Mrs. Kant ordered her husband to return to Bilmart to exchange the Hoover’s beans for Handell’s Beans.
Upon arrival at the store early the next morning, Mr. Kant found that the line for customer service was extremely long due to Bilmart’s annual sponsorship of a major community food drive. In an effort to save time, and thinking the line might be shorter upon his return, Mr. Kant placed the case of Hoover’s beans into a shopping cart, made his way through the store to the bean shelf, and then added the Handell’s beans to the cart. However, upon his return, the line had not diminished and it was obvious that Sam would be waiting a considerable amount of time to formalize the exchange. Fearing the wrath of his wife should he not return in time for lunch, Sam placed the case of Hoover’s beans inside a cart filled with what appeared to be merchandise returns in need of re-stocking. With the desired Handell’s beans in the shopping cart, Mr. Kant then proceeded to the store’s exit. As he neared the doors, Mr. Kant was approached and detained by store security, who witnessed Sam’s actions, and police were called to the store. Apparently, the cart into which Sam had placed the Hoover’s Beans did not contain returned items to be shelved, but rather, donations to the Bilmart Community Food Drive. Officers Kopp and Slickman questioned Mr. Kant and then cited him for Shoplifting.
Using Westlaw, research and cite at least one source of secondary authority relevant to Kant’s legal matter. Please also provide your search terms.
Explanation / Answer
The argument in the case is that the court made an error of judgement in holding Sam Kant guilty of committing the crime of shoplifting. The secondary authority relevant to this argument is following
Secondary authority - Blankenburg, Erhard. "The Selectivity of Legal Sanctions: An Empirical Investigation of Shoplifting." Law and Society Review 11 (1976]
Search terms are - boolean words "intent" and "shoplifting"
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.