(redirected from larcenist)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal.
Related to larcenist: larcener, Simple larceny


in law, the unlawful taking and carrying away of the property of another, with intent to deprive the owner of its use or to appropriate it to the use of the perpetrator or of someone else. It is usually distinguished from embezzlementembezzlement,
wrongful use, for one's own selfish ends, of the property of another when that property has been legally entrusted to one. Such an act was not larceny at common law because larceny was committed only when property was acquired by a "felonious taking," i.e.
..... Click the link for more information.
 and false pretenses in that the actual taking of the property is accomplished unlawfully and without the victim's consent (see robberyrobbery,
in law, felonious taking of property from a person against his will by threatening or committing force or violence. The injury or threat may be directed against the person robbed, his property, or the person or property of his relative or of anyone in his presence at
..... Click the link for more information.
); along with the taking there must be a carrying-off. It is also distinguished from burglaryburglary,
at common law, the breaking and entering of a dwelling house of another at night with the intent to commit a felony, whether the intent is carried out or not. This definition has been generally adopted with some modifications in the criminal law of the various states
..... Click the link for more information.
 in that the theft does not necessarily involve unlawful breaking and entering. Statutes in some states of the United States enlarge the scope of larceny to include embezzlement and false pretenses. Grand larceny, usually a felonyfelony
, any grave crime, in contrast to a misdemeanor, that is so declared in statute or was so considered in common law. In early English law a felony was a heinous act that canceled the perpetrator's feudal rights and forfeited his lands and goods to the king, thus depriving
..... Click the link for more information.
, is distinguished from petty larceny, usually a misdemeanormisdemeanor,
in law, a minor crime, in contrast to a felony. At common law a misdemeanor was a crime other than treason or a felony. Although it might be a grave offense, it did not affect the feudal bond or take away the offender's property. By the 19th cent.
..... Click the link for more information.
, by the value of the property stolen.
The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia™ Copyright © 2013, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
Even for larcenists, however, the mean sentence among those sentenced to serve time is 35 months, suggesting that any distortion due to this assumption is likely to be minimal.
The overall effect of conviction on the probability of employment is about -5 percentage points and significant for both fraud offenders and larcenists. Beneath the overall figure, the effect of conviction on employment probability is largest for offenders in the BOTH category (-8.5 points for fraud, -25.8 points for larceny) and smallest for offenders in the NEITHER category (-2.7 points and significant for fraud, -1.2 point and insignificant for larceny).
In his longitudinal estimates jail reduces the probability of employment by 15 to 30 percentage points from a mean of 87 percent, compared with -6 to -10 percentage points for the imprisoned fraud offenders and larcenists. The panel estimates here are much closer to Freeman's estimates of the effect of conviction and probation on employment, -3 to -9 percentage points, and they lend support to his estimates of the effect of conviction on employment, which are estimated with panel information on work but not criminality.
Here we restrict attention to the individuals who work both before and after conviction (1,336 fraud offenders and 397 larcenists) to estimate the effect of conviction on income.
Table 3 presents estimated conviction effects for fraud offenders and larcenists by education (college and noncollege graduate) and by offense and punishment characteristic (NEITHER, BREACH, PRISON, BOTH).(18) The table also reports breach of trust effects.
Larcenists committing a breach of trust experience a significant -8.0 percent conviction effect, and those sent to prison experience a significant -12.0 percent conviction effect.
If conviction effects result from the displacement effects that Kletzer documents, then we would expect the smallest effects for college-educated fraud offenders, who are much more likely to work at white collar jobs, and the largest results for less-educated larcenists.(22) We observe the opposite, suggesting that we are not documenting a simple displacement effect.
Criminals with the same mean preconviction income as larcenists and thieves ($10,312) can expect a reduction of $4705 (or 46 percent), while those with the same mean preconviction income as embezzlers and defrauders ($20,992) face a reduction of $13,451 (or 64 percent).(15) Table II provides TABULAR DATA OMITTED some evidence that this very simple result is not sensitive to different specifications of the endogenous variable (e.g., using only the logarithmic value of postconviction income) and different specifications of the income variables on the right-hand side of the regression (e.g., specifying preconviction income in logarithmic values).
Using the sample mean age, presentence income, and dollar amount stolen for bank larcenists, along with the coefficient estimates from column 2 in Table IV,(27) the postconviction income declines by $3,408 if his real income in the absence of a crime would have remained at his presentence level of $8,254.65, a reduction of 41 percent.
Larcenists were not a "protected class" for purposes of equal protection analysis, and consequently regulation of larcenists was presumptively allowed.