Case law Flashcards
R v Mulcahy
[conspiracy 2 or more]
A conspiracy consists of not merely the intention of two or more but the agreement of two or more people to commit an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means. So long as it remains an intention it is not indictable. When the act is carried out the very plot is the act itself
R v Sanders
[conspiracy ending]
A conspiracy does not end at the making of an agreement, it continues in operation and it’s existence is ended by the completion of it’s performance or abandonment or in any other manner by which agreements are discharged
R v White
[conspiracy other parties unknown]
Where you can prove a suspect has conspired with other parties (2 or more people) whose identity are unknown, the suspect can still be convicted even if the other parties identity is never established or remains unknown
R v Ring
[inferring intent from the act]
The offenders intent was to steal property by putting his hand into the pocket of the pocket of the victim. Unbeknownst to the offender the pocket was empty. The offender was still convicted of attempt theft as his intent was to steal whatever property was inside the pocket and was demonstrated by his actions
R v Harpur
[attempt multiple acts]
The court may have regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point when the conduct in question stops the defendant conduct may be considered in its entirety. Considering how much remains to be done is always relevant though not determinative
P v Higgins
[cultivate fake cannabis]
Where plants being cultivated as cannabis are in fact not cannabis it is physically not legally impossible to cultivate prohibited plants. Possible to be commit the offence of attempting to cultivate cannabis
P v Jay
[buying grass]
Man brought grass clippings thinking it was cannabis
R v Donnelly
[legally impossible act]
Where property has been returned to the owner or legal title given to 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 Pene
A party must intentionally help or encourage. It is insufficient if they were reckless as to whether the principal was assisted or encouraged
R v Renata
Where the principal offender can’t be identified it is sufficient to prove that each individual accused must have either been the principal or party in one of the ways by 66(1)
Police v Larkins
[Lack of assistance]
While it is unnecessary for the principal to be aware that they are being assisted, there must be proof of actual assistance
Police v Ashton
[Driving Ashton Ave]
An example of a secondary party owning a legal duty to a third party or to the general public is a person teaching another how to drive. That person is in NZ, under a legal duty to take reasonable precautions whilst in control of a dangerous thing
R v Russell
[Lots of water there]
The accused was morally bound to take active steps to save his children, but by his deliberate abstention, giving encouragement and authority of his presence and approval to his wifes act became a aider/abettor and thus a secondary offender.
R v Betts and Ridley
An offence where no violence is contemplated and the principal offender carrying out the common purpose uses violence, the secondary party taking no physical party is not liable for the violence used
R v Crooks
[Crooks knows no knowledge]
Knowledge means actual knowledge or belief in the sense of having no real doubt that the person assisted was party to an offence. Mere suspicion to their involvement is not enough
R v Briggs
[stolen lawnmower Briggs and Stratton]
Knowledge may be inferred by wilful blindness or a deliberate abstention from making inquires that would confirm the suspected truth
R v Mane
[Maine]
To be considered an accessory the acts done by the person must be after the completion of the offence
R v Gibbs
[Gisborne needs supplies]
Acts done by the accessory must in some way helped the other person to evade justice
R v Levy
[ACC levy to do with currency]
Levy had done a deliberate act in relation to the evidence against the offender for the purpose of assisting that offender to evade justice
R v Cox
Possession involves two elements. The first is the physical element of actual or potential physical custody or control.
The second, is the mental element is a combination of knowledge and intention. The knowledge in the sense of awareness that the substance is in his possession and intention to exercise possession.
R v Cullen
Four elements of possession for receiving
1) Awareness that the item is where it is
2) Awareness that the item has been stolen
3) Actual or potential control of the item
4) An intention to exercise control over the item
R v Donnelly
Where stolen property is returned to it’s owner or given legal title to any such person it is not an offence to subsequently receive it, even though the receiver may know it was previously stolen or dishonestly obtained
R v Lucinsky
The property received must be the property stolen or illegally obtained (or part of), not some other item for which the illegally obtained property had been exchanged or which are the proceeds
R v Kennedy
The guilty knowledge that the thing has been stolen or dishonesty obtained must exist at the time of receiving
