James Kimball entered a party store after drinking vodka and taking medication. He pet the store dog and approached a cash register, demanding money from the clerk. The clerk did not take the demands seriously at first. Kimball was charged with and convicted of attempted unarmed robbery at a bench trial. The appellate court reversed the conviction, finding that while Kimball committed overt acts, there was insufficient evidence that he possessed the specific intent to commit robbery. The case was remanded for a new trial.

1. HaroldSowardsII
CJ 322, Tu/Th 9:30
10/5/15
People v. Kimball
311 N.W. 2d 343 (Mich. App. 1981)
1. Facts
 JamesKimball goesovertoSandraStorey’shouse anddrinkssome vodkaandtakesa
Eskaleth300 pill
 On May 21, 1979 he arrivesatAlpine PartyStore at 8:15
 Upon enteringthe store,beginstopetandplaywiththe guarddog and thenapproaches
SusanStanchfield’sregister
 Kimball demandsmoneyfromherwhichshe thinksisajoke until the secondtime
aroundwhenmoneyisemphasized
 StoreyhelpsKimballexitthe store andStanchfieldtellshimshe won’treportaslongas
he doesn’treturnto the store
 Upon leavingthe store,Stanchfieldhasanothercustomertake downtheirlicense plate
while she calls911
 Kimball getschargedwithattemptedunarmedrobberyatabenchtrial thattook place
on Aug.1979 and issentencedto3-5 yrs
 Appeals
 Decisionisreversedandremanded
2. Issue
Didthe defendant,JamesKimball,undertakethe actsinside the store withspecificintentto
commitan unarmedrobbery?
3. Holdings
No,reversed/remanded
4. Reasoning
Usingan elementof attempt,specificallythe one regardingthatanovertact goingbeyondmere
preparationtowardsthe commissionof the crime,itisclearto sayin an instantcase that the
defendantcommittedsufficientovertact.However,afterhearingall the evidencethe trial court
foundthat the defendantpossessedthe requisite intentandtheydidn’tbelieve thatthe findings
of thiswere erroneous.Itdidn’tallow the defendanttoprove thathe voluntarilyabandonedhis
attemptto rob the store.