Boston, Ronald Glen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding appellant’s “conduct in reaching over the counter and taking money from the cash register was threatening .because his actions were a ‘menacing indication of (something dangerous, evil, etc.)’ ”
• noting that party’s “conduct in reaching over the counter and taking money from the cash register was threatening because his actions were ‘a menacing indication of (something dangerous, evil, etc.
• concerning aggravated robbery, the court discussed but did not resolve the question of whether victim must perceive the threat
• finding there was sufficient evidence for a rational jury to infer the threat was perceived
• construing robbery statute to resolve appellant’s claim that evidence was insufficient because evidence showed victim did not perceive threat and perception of threat was required to prove element of “threatens” under robbery statute
• “The jury, as the exclusive judge of the facts, is entitled to weigh and resolve conflicts in the evidence and draw reasonable inferences therefrom.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).