4. Robbery, Burglary and Blackmail Flashcards

1
Q

R v Dawson and James

A

Nudge is force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

R v Clouden

A

Grabbing shopping bag is force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

P v DPP

A

Removing cigarette from V’s hand is not force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

R v DPP

A

No need for victim to be in fear of force, so long as he thinks it will be used against him

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Grant v CPS

A

Posits that apprehension by victim that force will be used against him is necessary

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

R v Taylor

A

Threat to harm 3P isn’t seeking to put person in fear of being then and there subjected to force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

R v Hale

A

Appropriation treated as continuous act, so Ds convicted of robbery when use force after the actual appropriation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

R v Collins

A

‘Effective and substantial’ entry required

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

R v Brown

A

Only effective entry required

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

R v Ryan

A

Entry need not be either ‘substantial’ or ‘effective’ – matter for jury whether there has been an ‘entry’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Stevens v Gourley

A

Building must be ‘a structure of considerable size and intended to be permanent or at least endure for a considerable time’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

B and S v Leathley

A

Large freezer container which was detached from its chassis and had been resting on railway sleepers for 2 years – counts as a building

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Norfolk v Seekings

A

Similar containers, still on their wheeled chassis, positioned at rear of supermarket and used for temporary storage, held not to be buildings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

R v Walkington

A

Part of a building

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

R v Laing

A

Where at time of entering a person is not a trespasser but later becomes one, there can be no conviction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

R v Jones and Smith

A

Entry in excess of permission - trespassers

17
Q

R v G

A

Recklessness - D is aware of risk and, in circumstances known to him, it would be unreasonable to take the risk

18
Q

A-G’s References (Nos 1 and 2 of 1979)

A

Conditional intent

19
Q

R v Stones

A

Phrase ‘intended by the person having it with him for such use’ does not impose a requirement to prove that the intended use was with respect to the particular burglary

20
Q

R v Kelly

A

Time at which K must have weapon of offence was at the time he actually stole

21
Q

R v O’Leary

A

D breaks into house and then picked up kitchen knife - armed when stole, so convicted under s 9(1)(b)

22
Q

R v Klass

A

Accomplice with weapon doesn’t enter caravan - not guilty of aggravated burglary

23
Q

R v Francis

A

Ds armed with sticks - demand entry - then discard sticks and steal items - not convicted, since they may have entered with weapons of offence, but there was no evidence that at the point of entry they intended to steal

24
Q

R v Collister

A

There does not have to be an actual express demand – enough that Ds instil in V’s mind that a demand is being made

25
Q

R v Lawrence and Pomroy

A

Menace can be express or implied

26
Q

Thorne v Motor Trade Associations

A

Menace extends to ‘threats of any action detrimental to or unpleasant to the person addressed’

27
Q

R v Harry

A

Menace is strong word, suggesting high degree of coercion

28
Q

R v Clear

A

Test is objective: threats must be such that the mind of an ordinary person of normal stability and courage might be influenced or made apprehensive so as to accede unwillingly to the demand

29
Q

R v Garwood

A

Where V is particularly vulnerable or of a timid nature jury may find menaces existed, provided D was aware of affect of his actions on V

30
Q

R v Bevans

A

‘Pain relief’ counts as having monetary value (because injection has monetary value)

31
Q

R v Harvey

A

Demand unwarranted because accompanied by threat which itself amounts to criminal offence