711.1 ROBBERY DEFINED.
A person commits a robbery when, having the intent to commit a
theft, the person does any of the following acts to assist or further
the commission of the intended theft or the person's escape from the
scene thereof with or without the stolen property:
1. Commits an assault upon another.
2. Threatens another with or purposely puts another in fear of
immediate serious injury.
3. Threatens to commit immediately any forcible felony.
It is immaterial to the question of guilt or innocence of robbery
that property was or was not actually stolen.
Sounds like the original charge was justified. He knew he would be toast if he chose to take the robbery charge to trial. So he pled guilty to third degree theft:
1. The theft of property exceeding ten thousand dollars in value,
or the theft of property from the person of another, or from a
building which has been destroyed or left unoccupied because of
physical disaster, riot, bombing, or the proximity of battle, or the
theft of property which has been removed from a building because of a
physical disaster, riot, bombing, or the proximity of battle, is
theft in the first degree. Theft in the first degree is a class "C"
felony.
Obviously, he never took anything worth anything near 10k as required by the theft charge. But that he still chose to to plead guilty to plead guilty to the theft charge shows that the prosecution would have had no trouble convicting him on the robbery charge.
