Attempts to Commit an Offence Flashcards
Definition of Attempts
Sec.72(1) C.A 61
Every one 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.
What are the 3 elements of an attempt offence that must be established?
- Intent - to commit an offence.
- Act - that they did, or omitted to do, something to achieve that end.
- Proximity - that their act or omission was sufficiently close.
With regards to attempts explain ‘sufficiently proximate’.
The act(s) must be sufficiently proximate to the full offence. Must have started to commit the full offence & gone beyond mere preparation. This is the “all but” rule.
Explain ‘sufficiently proximate’.
The act(s) must be sufficiently proximate to the full offence. Must have started to commit the full offence & gone beyond mere preparation. This is the “all but” rule.
What is the test for proximity?
- Has the offender done anything more than getting himself into a position from which he could embark on an actual attempt?
- Has the offender actually commenced execution, i.e. has he taken a step in the actual offence itself?
Where are you not able to charge a person with an attempt to commit an offence?
- the criminality depends on recklessness or negligence, e.g. manslaughter.
- an attempt is included within the definition of that offence, e.g. assault.
- the offence has to have been completed for the offence to exist at all, e.g. demanding with menaces.
Explain impossibility.
A person can be convicted of an offence that was physically impossible to commit, but cannot be convicted of an offence that was legally impossible to commit.
When is an act physically or factually impossible?
If the suspect is unable to commit it due to interruption, ineptitude, or any other circumstances beyond his or her control.
R v Ring
The offender’s intent was to steal property by putting his hand into the pocket of the victim. Unbeknown to him the victim’s 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 & demonstrated by his actions.
Higgins v Police
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 bought hedge clippings believing they were cannabis.
When is an act legally impossible?
where the completed act would not be an offence. The suspect cannot be convicted of attempt, even where they may have had the criminal intent.
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.
R v Harpur
Sent a series of text messages relating to sexual offending on a child and arranged to meet with the child. C.O.A. held - Harpur’s conduct was sufficiently proximate to the full offence. His actions need not be considered in isolation; sufficient evidence of his intent was available from the events leading up to that point.
What is the test for proximity?
- Has the offender done anything more than getting himself into a position from which he could embark on an actual attempt?
- Has the offender actually commenced execution, i.e. has he taken a step in the actual offence itself?
