P. v. Lam CA4/1
A jury convicted Dennis Edward Lam of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) under the theory he used force or fear to retain stolen property initially taken without force or fear. This theory of robbery was recognized in People v. Estes (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 23, 27-28 (Estes) and is sometimes referred to as an Estes robbery.
On appeal, Lam contends we must reverse his robbery conviction because the Estes case was wrongly decided. He invites us to reexamine the case and criticize this theory of robbery. We decline the invitation as the California Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the validity of this theory of robbery and the Supreme Court's decisions are binding on us. (Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 455 (Auto Equity Sales).) We, therefore, affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Lam CA4/1