Elements
- 1. Fraudulent ("with intent to deprive," some say "permanently," also must be & not believe one's own.
- Larceny: can substitute; embezzlement: can't substitute (even with fungible property).
- This is to avoid problem of people always saying they were going to return it. Not as much of a problem with larceny, where other aspects make it easier to check this.
- Even if I'm wrong about that I am not entitled to it, I am not guilty if I think it's mine (or that I am owed a debt).
- "Claim of right" negates intent to deprive
- 2. Appropriation ("inconsistent with what owner has authorized")
- 3. Property
- 4. Of another
- 5. By one who has been entrusted with possession
- See Diamond, supplement, p. 59
- Defendants, officers of a corporation, had drawing accounts with the corporation.
- Their withdrawals were made openly and the advancement of funds was a common practice in the corporation.
- However, most of the withdrawals were made without the approval of the board of directors.
- Defendants were convicted of conspiring to commit the crime of grand theft by appropriating corporate funds.
- The court affirmed, holding that while secrecy or concealment was evidence of criminal intent, there may be embezzlement even where the appropriation of funds was made openly.
- The fact that the defendants may have intended to replace the funds did not change the fact that they fraudulently appropriated the funds.
