On August 27, 2007, an 87-year-old woman’s purse was stolen in a supermarket parking lot. As a result, the defendant, Nelson Rolon, was charged with, and ultimately convicted of, first-degree robbery. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison, with twelve years to serve and the remainder suspended, with probation. He now appeals his conviction to this Court, arguing that the trial justice erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal because the evidence produced at trial was legally insufficient to prove the element of force. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm (5–1) the judgment of the Superior Court.

Facts

On September 28, 2007, a grand jury indicted defendant for the first-degree robbery of Irene Joseph, an elderly person, in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-39-1(a). Although § 11-39-1 sets forth the penalties for the different degrees of robbery, it does not define the elements of that crime. Consequently, we long have held that § 11-39-1 incorporates the common-law definition of robbery, that definition being the felonious and forcible taking from the person of another of goods or money of any value by violence or by putting the victim in fear.1 The defendant’s trial took place in December 2008. The state did not present Ms. Joseph as a witness at the trial because, at that time, she was eighty-nine years old and confined to a nursing home. The state did, however, present six witnesses against defendant, the substance of whose testimonies we review below. [Only testimony of witnesses regarding the element of force is included in this excerpt.].......

1. List all the facts relevant to deciding whether Nelson Rolon robbed 87-year-old Irene Joseph.

2. Summarize the majority’s argument upholding Rolon’s conviction.

3. Summarize the dissent’s argument that Rolon committed theft not robbery.

4. In your opinion did Rolon rob Joseph? Defend your answer.