Our Philadelphia criminal defense lawyers can help you with carjacking (Robbery of a Motor Vehicle) charges. We have successfully defended thousands of clients.
Philadelphia Robbery of a Motor Vehicle Lawyer
Carjacking is a particularly serious form of robbery, and the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office recently created a new unit of prosecutors which is specially assigned to prosecute these offenses and seek significant penalties. Federal prosecutors also take this particular charge incredibly seriously, so if you or your loved one have been charged in connection with a carjacking, you should speak with an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately. In Pennsylvania, the statute which prohibits carjacking is the Robbery of a Motor Vehicle statute. The Commonwealth will charge Robbery of a Motor Vehicle when the defendant is alleged to have stolen or taken a motor vehicle from someone else without permission when the motor vehicle is in the presence of the person. Essentially, it requires the defendant to steal a motor vehicle and for the owner or rightful possessor of the car to be present.
Is Robbery of a Motor Vehicle a felony?
Robbery of a Motor Vehicle is always a felony of the first degree, making it a particularly serious charge. First degree felonies are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Robbery of a Motor Vehicle is also a crime of violence under Pennsylvania's Three Strikes law. If the defendant has previously been convicted of certain crimes of violence, Robbery of a Motor Vehicle could carry a mandatory minimum of 10-20 years of incarceration for a second strike and 25-life for a third strike. Even without priors, the sentencing guidelines suggest jail time for carjacking.
Defenses to Robbery and Robbery of a Motor Vehicle (Carjacking)
Although Robbery of a Motor Vehicle is a very serious charge, there are often defenses. Many of the same defenses that apply to an ordinary Robbery will also be applicable in a Robbery of a Motor Vehicle case.
Possession of a Stolen Car Is Not Enough. For example, Robbery of a Motor Vehicle cases often start out with the defendant getting pulled over by police because the police ran the license plate of the vehicle the defendant was in and determined that the vehicle had been reported stolen in a carjacking. However, just because the defendant was found driving the vehicle some time later does not mean that the defendant was also the person who committed the Robbery. Stolen cars frequently change hands quickly, and the driver of a stolen car may not even realize that the car had been stolen, let alone stolen in a carjacking. Therefore, the prosecution has to show that the defendant actually committed the carjacking - not just that the defendant was operating a stolen vehicle at some point in time.
Misidentification. Robbery of a Motor Vehicle frequently raises issues surrounding the identification of the robber. In many cases, it may be possible to challenge an eyewitness identification through the use of a motion for a lineup, based on differences in the description given and the physical characteristics of the defendant arrested, or even through the use of expert testimony on the many problems inherent in eyewitness identifications.
Constitutional Issues. In every criminal case, the police must be able to prove that they obtained the evidence which the prosecutors seek to introduce at trial in a manner that complies with both the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions. If the police conducted an illegal search, seizure, or interrogation, or failed to get a search warrant when they should have done so, then it may be possible to have evidence suppressed by filing a motion to suppress. If the trial court grants a motion to suppress important evidence, then the case against the defendant may be much weaker, or the prosecution may not even be able to proceed at all. Therefore, our attorneys will carefully review the police reports, body camera footage, witness statements, and other evidence in order to determine whether the police may have violated a client’s constitutional rights.
Witness Credibility. In some cases, it may be necessary to challenge the credibility of the witnesses. For example, if the complainant asserts that the defendant took the car from them during some kind of argument or fight, the prosecution could potentially charge Robbery of a Motor Vehicle. This situation is most likely to arise in a case involving some sort of domestic violence allegation. In this type of case, it may be a defense that the complainant is not telling the truth about the circumstances under which the car was taken or who actually usually drives the car. If the defendant regularly drives the car with the complainant’s permission, then the taking of the car during an argument or fight may not qualify as a carjacking. Each case is different, and it is important to have an experienced defense attorney carefully review the evidence and investigate the allegations in order to determine the best possible defense.
Can juveniles be charged with Robbery of a Motor Vehicle in adult court?
Yes, it is increasingly common for the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office to file charges against juveniles who are alleged to have committed a carjacking in adult court. Cases involving Robbery of a Motor Vehicle charges will almost always begin in adult court in the Criminal Justice Center rather than Family Court even if the defendant is a juvenile. This is called a direct-file juvenile (“DFJ”) case. Prosecutors have become increasingly aggressive with respect to trying to prosecute juveniles in adult court for these alleged offenses. Although the case almost always begins in adult court, that does not mean that it will stay there. Once a minor has been charged in adult court, it is often possible to file a motion to decertify the case and have the case re-slated to Family Court. Negotiations for this result may begin immediately, but the legal process of filing a decertification motion typically takes place after the preliminary hearing. If a Common Pleas judge rules that the case should be heard in Family Court, then the case would be transferred to the juvenile division, and the potential penalties become much less severe. An adult criminal conviction could result in a permanent criminal record and lengthy state prison sentence, whereas a juvenile case may result in probation, placement in a juvenile facility for about a year, and a record that is sealed and can later be expunged. Although juvenile carjacking cases are still serious, the juvenile system is much more focused on rehabilitation, and the consequences are much less permanent. Our criminal defense attorneys have successfully litigated numerous decertification motions to have cases transferred to Family Court for clients who were under 18 at the time of the alleged offense.
Given the seriousness of the offense and the real potential for incarceration, it is critical that anyone charged with Robbery of a Motor Vehicle or any type of Robbery in Philadelphia or the surrounding counties contact an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately.
Goldstein Mehta LLC Robbery Lawyers
CALL A PHILADELPHIA ROBBERY OF A MOTOR VEHICLE LAWYER TODAY
The Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyers of Goldstein Mehta LLC have extensive experience and a proven track record of success in defending Robbery of a Motor Vehicle and other related charges. If you need a lawyer for carjacking or Robbery of a Motor vehicle charges, you should contact us immediately. We have won motions for lineups, pre-trial motions to suppress identification and physical evidence, obtained dismissals at preliminary hearings, and successfully convinced judges and juries of the defendant's innocence by pointing out inaccuracies in the eyewitness' or complainant's testimony. If you are facing carjacking charges, we need to start working on your case right away. Valuable evidence such as surveillance video footage or the emergency police radio tapes could be destroyed due to delay. Start planning your defense today. Call 267-225-2545 for a complimentary 15-minute criminal defense strategy session.
The Robbery of a Motor Vehicle Statute
§ 3702. Robbery of motor vehicle.
(a) Offense defined.--A person commits a felony of the first degree if he steals or takes a motor vehicle from another person in the presence of that person or any other person in lawful possession of the motor vehicle.
(b) Sentencing.--The Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 2154 (relating to adoption of guidelines for sentencing), shall provide for a sentencing enhancement for an offense under this section.