Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

People v. Krovarz Case Brief

Supreme Court of Colorado1985Docket #424759
697 P.2d 378 1985 Colo. LEXIS 400

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: Defendant was acquitted of attempted aggravated robbery because the trial court found he lacked specific intent. The appellate court disapproved, holding that “knowledge” is a sufficient culpable mental state for criminal attempt.

Legal Significance: Clarified that for criminal attempt, the culpable mental state of “knowledge” regarding the elements of the underlying offense is sufficient, not necessarily requiring “specific intent” to achieve the proscribed result or commit the underlying crime.

People v. Krovarz Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

The defendant, Victor Krovarz, approached a cashier, put a putty knife to her throat, and demanded money from the cash register. A customer intervened and subdued him. Krovarz was charged with attempted aggravated robbery. At trial, the defense presented evidence that Krovarz was depressed and suicidal, and his actions were intended to get him returned to a mental hospital rather than to obtain money. However, a psychologist testified, and Krovarz confirmed, that he did intend to engage in the conduct constituting the attempted robbery, was aware he placed the victim in fear, and was aware that he was practically certain to obtain money as a result of his acts. The district court, relying on People v. Frysig, acquitted Krovarz, finding the prosecution failed to prove specific intent to commit aggravated robbery, although it stated its ruling would differ if “knowing” were the required mental state. The People appealed the district court’s ruling as a question of law.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Did the district court err in ruling that criminal attempt liability requires a specific intent to commit the underlying crime, or does a culpable mental state of “knowledge” regarding the elements of the underlying offense suffice?

Ruling disapproved. The district court erred in requiring proof of specific intent Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aut

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Did the district court err in ruling that criminal attempt liability requires a specific intent to commit the underlying crime, or does a culpable mental state of “knowledge” regarding the elements of the underlying offense suffice?

Conclusion

This case establishes that in Colorado, the mens rea for criminal attempt Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.

Legal Rule

A person commits criminal attempt if, acting with the kind of culpability Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in re

Legal Analysis

The Colorado Supreme Court disapproved the district court's ruling, clarifying the mens Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dol

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Holding: A culpable mental state of “knowledge” is sufficient to support
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, su

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More