2. Attempts to Commit an Offence Flashcards
Once an offender has committed acts that are sufficiently proximate to the full offence, there are three situations that do not amount to a defence to the charge. What are those three situations?
Were prevented by some outside agent from doing something that was necessary to
complete the offence, eg interruption from police.
Failed to complete the full offence due to ineptitude, inefficiency or insufficient means,
eg insufficient explosive to blow apart a safe.
Were prevented from committing the crime because an intervening event made it
physically impossible, eg removal of property before intended theft.
What was held in the case or R v Donnelly in relation to attempts?
Where stolen property has been returned to the owner or legal title to any such property has been acquired by any person, it is not an offence to subsequently receive it,
even though the receiver may know that the property had previously been stolen or dishonestly obtained .
The court decided that despite Donnelly’s mens rea and actus reus, it was legally impossible for him to receive stolen property as those goods were no longer deemed to be stolen. His conviction was set aside. An attempt to receive such stolen goods is therefore possible in fact, but impossible in law.
What elements must be proved to successfully prosecute someone for attempting to commit an offence?
Intent (mens rea) - intended to commit an offence, and
Act (Actus reus) - That they did, or omitted to do, something to achieve that end.
Proximity - That their act or omission was sufficiently close.
What are three groups of offences that do not allow for a prosecution in respect of an attempt?
The criminality depends on recklessness or negligence; ie manslaughter.
An attempt to commit an offence is included within the definition of that offence, eg
assault.
The crime is such that the act must be completed in order for the offence to exist at all, eg
person cannot attempt to demand money with menaces.
**where a person is charged with the attempt, but the evidence establishes that the defendant did in fact commit the full offence, what can they be convicted of?
Attempt only
True or false:
An attempt is complete when the defendant commits an act that is sufficiently proximate to the intended offence, even if they them change their mind and voluntarily withdraw
True
The acts carried out by the defendant may be looked at collectively when determining proximity, but in doing so you must take into account the circumstances of each case, including:
- Fact, degree, common sense and seriousness of the offence
Case law has determined that 3 conditions must be present to succeed in an attempt conviction. What are they?
- Mens rea
- Actus reus
- Proximity
What must you prove in an case of attempt?
- The ID of the suspect
- They intended to commit an offence
- They did or omitted to do, something to achieve their object
Penalties for attempts where the punishment is not expressly provided:
311(1): not exceeding 10 years if the imprisonment is life, half the max punishment for the full offence otherwise
**If a defendant is charged with the full offence, but is found guilty of only the attempt, can they be convicted of an attempt?
Yes
When can you NOT charge someone with an attempt to commit an offence?
- The criminality depends on recklessness or negligence, eg manslaughter
- An attempt to commit an offence is included within the definition of that offence, e.g. assault
- The offence is such that the act has to be completed for the offence to exist e.g. demanding with menaces
Function jury:
Decide whether the facts presented by the crown have been proved beyond reasonable doubt and, if so, must decide whether the defendant’s acts are close enough to the full offence
*Function of judge:
decide whether defendant has left the prep stage and was already trying to effect completion of full offence
Is an attempt complete even if the defendant changes his mind or makes a voluntary withdrawal after the act?
yes
