New Case Helps Define How Much Physical Resistance Used to Try to Retake Property Being Stolen Equates to “Robbery by Force”
Ray  Hill
Ray Hill
  • Ref # CAC10094
  • September 29, 2025

New Case Helps Define How Much Physical Resistance Used to Try to Retake Property Being Stolen Equates to “Robbery by Force”

Case Alert 
By Raymond Hill  
Professor Emeritus, Santa Rosa Junior College 

Physical resistance to retake property, however minimal, constitutes robbery by force 
Peo. v. Mendez-Torres 1DCA 8/27/25, 2025 WL2463118, 2025 Cal. App. Lexis 541 

Facts: The defendant entered a gas station mini mart in Sonoma County. A cash register with a computer and receipt printer was on the counter. The defendant wrestled the register off the counter. The cashier tried to retrieve it but could only manage to get her left hand on top of it. The defendant yanked the register away and the inner cash drawer containing $2,850 fell to the floor. He picked it up and fled. The incident was recorded on a surveillance camera. 

The cashier obtained the license number of the fleeing vehicle. The vehicle was recovered the following day in a city park. Found inside were clothes worn by the defendant during the crime, a traffic citation issued by the Gilroy Police Department and a property receipt from the Monterey County Jail in the defendant’s name. The cash drawer was also recovered but contained just coins and receipts. 

The question before the appellate court was whether there was sufficient “taking from a person by force” to constitute robbery. 

Held: 1DCA ruled the cashier touching the register while trying to retrieve it was sufficient to constitute a “taking from a person.” The cashier engaged in some level of physical resistance, however minimal. A jury could have found the defendant accomplished the theft by force, even if the victim had not physically resisted the taking of the property.    

Notes: Kudos to Officer Guadalupe (Lupita) Figueroa, Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety, for her proactive patrol work in apprehending this defendant, who had a strike conviction. Later in the evening after the crime, she pulled over the defendant in a different vehicle for making a turn without signaling. He stated he had no identification and gave a false name. While Figueroa conducted further inquiries, the defendant sped away at 25mph over the speed limit, ran a stop sign, then crashed into a parked vehicle. The incident yielded a response with lights and sirens, which added more charges in the criminal complaint. The defendant fled into a creek and was eventually apprehended. He had $1,965 in cash in his pocket. A subsequent blood test showed he had ingested methamphetamine. 

Simple traffic stops turn into bigger cases!  Great job!

Court Case Name
Peo. v. Mendez-Torres 1DCA 8/27/25, 2025 WL2463118, 2025 Cal. App. Lexis 541
Link
Sign Up