Attempts To Commit An Offence Flashcards
Attempts
Legislation
(1) Does or omits
S72 CA61
(1) Everyone, who, having an intent to commit an offence, does or omits an act for the purpose of accomplishing his object, is guilty of an attempt to commit the offence intended, whether in the circumstances it was possible to commit the offence or not.
(2) The question whether an act done or omitted with intent to commit an offence is or is not only preparation for the commission of that offence, and too remote to constitute an attempt to commit it, is a question of law - decided by a judge.
(3) immediately or proximately
(3) an act done it omitted with intent to commit an offence may constitute an attempt of it is immediately or proximately connected with the intended offence, whether or not there was any act unequivocally showing the intent to commit that offence.
What three conditions must apply for an “attempt” conviction to succeed?
- Intent (men’s rea) - to commit an offence.
- act (actus reus) - that they did, or omitted to do, something to achieve that end.
- proximity - that their act or omission was sufficient close.
Inferring intent from the act
- the intent of the offender(S) may be inferred from the act itself (what they did) and/or proved by admissions or confessions (what they said)
R V RING
Attempted theft
(Physically impossible, legally possible)
- In this case the offenders intent was to steal property by putting his hand into the pocket of the victim. Unbeknown to the offender the pocket was empty. Despite this he was able to be convicted of attempted theft because the intent to steal whatever property might have been discovered inside the pocket was present in his mind and demonstrated by his actions. The remaining elements were also satisfied.
A question of fact
- whether that intent exists or not is a question of fact; a question that the jury decides
How is offence/crime defined?
- any act or omission that is punishable on conviction under any enactment, and are demarcated into four categories within s6, criminal procedure act 2011
Actus reus
- “does or omits an act for the purpose of accomplishing his object” refers to to the action or conduct (physical) which is a constituent element of an offence, the actus reus. ‘Guilty act’
What is it meant by ‘Acts must be sufficiently proximate to the full offence’?
- effectively, the accused must have started to commit the full offence and have gone beyond the phase of mere preparation- this is the “all but” rule.
What are some acts that may constitute an attempt to commit an offence according to the American model penal code?
- laying in wait, searching for or following contemplated victim
- enticing the victim to go to the scene of contemplated crime
- reconnoitring the scene of the contemplated crime
- unlawfully entering a structure, vehicle or enclosure in which it is contemplated that the crime will be committed.
R v HARPUR
- “The court may have regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point where the conduct in question stops… The defendants conduct [may] be considered in its entirety. Considering how much remains to be done is always relevant though not determinative.”
What is the test for proximity?
- Has the offender done anything more that getting himself into a position from which he could embark on an actual attempt? Or
- has the offender actually commenced execution; that is to say, has he taken a step in the actual crime itself.
YES=attempt
NO=preparation - not offence
When is an act physically or factually impossible?
- an act is physically or factually impossible if the act in question amounts to an offence, but the suspect is unable to commit it due to interpretation, ineptitude, or any other tbh r circumstances beyond their control
HIGGINS V R
HIGGINS V R
- where plants being cultivated as cannabis are not in fact cannabis it is physically, not legally impossible to cultivate such prohibited plants. Accordingly, it is possible to commit the offence of attempting to cultivate cannabis.
Police V Jay
- a man brought hedge clippings believing they were cannabis
Could be convicted because they acted with criminal intent
When is an act legally impossible?
Where the completed act is legally impossible - that is, where the completed act would not be an offence - the suspect cannot be convicted of an attempt, even where they have had criminal intent.
Must be an attempt to commit an actual offence.
R v DONNELLY
- 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 “.
When is an attempt complete?
- An attempt is complete even when the defendant changes their Ming or makes a voluntary withdrawal after completing an act that is sufficiently proximate to the intended offence.
Once the acts are sufficiently proximate, the defendant has no defence that they:
- were prevented by some outside agent from doing something that could as necessary to complete the offence; eg interception from police.
- failed to complete the full offence due to ineptitude, inefficiency or insufficient means;eg insufficient explosive to blow apart safe.
- were prevented from committing the offence because an intervening event made it physically impossible, eg removing of property before intended theft.
Can you attempt to commit an attempt?
- no, an attempt to commit an offence is in itself an offence
When can you NOT charge someone with an attempt to commit an offence?
Where:
- the criminality depends on recklessness or negligence, eg manslaughter
- an attempt to commit an offence is included within the definition of that offence, eg assault
- the offence is such that the act has to have
Been completed in order for the offence to exist at all. For example, demanding with menace. (demand accompanied by menace that constitutes the offence)
