The People of the State of New York v. Laureano Alamo, Jr.

Summary

The Court of Appeals affirmed the defendant's convictions, holding that movement of an automobile is not required to establish the elements of larceny and that a charge of attempted larceny was unnecessary because the evidence could support a finding of completed larceny. Chief Judge Breitel dissented, arguing that some movement is essential and that the jury should have been instructed on attempt.