In what circumstances will the court instruct the jury in a robbery case to consider theft and attempted theft?

Appellant relies on Reeves in support of his argument. In that robbery case, the defendant argued and the appellate court agreed, that the court should have instructed the jury on the lesser included offenses of theft and attempted theft. (People v. Reeves, supra, 91 Cal.App.4th at pp. 50-51.) The evidence established that the victim woke to find the defendant in her bedroom, struggled and in the process, suffered a brutal assault. Thereafter, the defendant fled after hearing police sirens. Although nothing belonging to the victim was stolen, her jewelry box was moved from the bathroom to the living room, and jewelry belonging to her roommate was later discovered missing. (Id. at p. 52.) The court found that the defendant had moved the jewelry found in the living room before the assault and found there was no indication that the assault on the victim was motivated by an intent to steal her property. The court found the evidence was consistent with an attempted theft, since it was undisputed that the defendant moved the property with the intent of stealing it. (Id. at pp. 52-53.)