Was there something unlawful about the customer’s possession of the item inside the store?
Now, with your contorted view of things, answer the question:
When did that item become her personal property? Before she actually made a contract of sale with the retailer by exchanging something of value (money) for the property? Or, when it was unpaid for and taken off the shelf within the physical confines of the store’s facility? If she decided not to pay for it and simply abandoned it in the basket within the store, was it still her personal property?
Come on! Use some common sense.
Sigh. Please re-read my original post.
"Personal Property" in the law has absolutely nothing to do with ownership.
The laptop was "personal property" from the moment it was created, because personal property, in the law, means things that are tangible and not fixed to real property. Goods such as a laptop are considered personal property whether they are owned by an individual, corporation or other entity.
You are trying to wedge the colloquial use of the term "personal property" into the legal definition.
If I lend you my lawnmower, and someone pulls a gun on you and takes it from you, does it mean that person did not commit a robbery because you were not the owner of the lawnmower?
Of course a robbery is committed in that instance. Any other result would be absurd. The law does not anticipate that the crook would inquire about ownership before they take it in order to be convicted of the crime.
To answer your question: the store retained ownership of the item until it was paid for. The computer was at all times legally personal property, whether she paid for it or abandoned it in the cart.
Perhaps it will be clearer if I substitute the legal definition for the term "personal property." When the suspect took a "tangible and movable item" from the customer's hands using force a robbery was committed.