Case Law Flashcards
Intent
Circumstantial evidence
Actions words before during after/surrounding circumstances/nature of act
R v Collister
Intent
Nature of blow or gash point strongly to presence of necessary intent
R v Taisalika
Recklessness
Def. Recognised there was real possibility that:
His actions would bring proscribed result
That proscribed circumstances existed
Having regard to risk action were unreasonable
Cameron v R
Recklessness
Defendant knows or has a conscious appreciation of risk and makes deliberate decision to run the risk
R v Tipple
Bodily Harm
Any hurt or injury that interferes with health or comfort. More that trifling or transitory
R v Donovan
Grievous means no more and no less than serious
DPP v Smith
Wound
Breaking of the skin evidence by flow of blood, internal or external
R v Waters
Disfigures
Deform/Deface/Mar/Alter the figure or appearance of a person
R v Rapana and Murray
Aggravated
Intention to Commit imprisonable offence
Intention to cause specified harm or foresaw their actions where likely to cause harm
R v Tihi
Aggravated
Must be proof of the attempt of commission of the crime by person committing assault.
R v Wati
191(1)(a)
Not necessary to prove intended crime was actually committed
R v Sturm
Stupefies
Effect mind and nervous system which seriously interferes with physical/mental ability
R v Sturm
Violent means
Incapable of resistance includes powerlessness of will as well as physical activity
(Gun held to head)
R v Crossan
Taking
Robbery complete instant property is taken even if only momentary
R v Lapier
Claim of right defence to robbery
If honest held belief of claim of right then negatives one element of robbery and full offence not made out
R v Skivington
Intent
Immediate return of goods by robber does not purge the offence. Intent existed at time of taking.
R v Peat
Possession
Two elements:
Physical element being actual physical custody or control
Mental element being combination of knowledge by accused that he had property and intention to exercise possession
R v Cox
Accompanied by violence
Connection and link between violence and theft
R V Maihi
Violence
Actions of defendant forcibly interfere with victims personal freedom- more than minimal
Peneha v Police
Threat
Manifestation of intention to inflict violence can be word or actions.
Surrounding circumstances provides context (age, physique, appearance,demeanour, words, manner
R v Broughton
Being together with any other persons
(Must establish two people present)
R v Joyce
Being together
Common intention to use combined force directly in the perpetration of crime
R v Galey
Offensive weapon
Must be a thing, hand or fingers not sufficient.
R v Bentham
Property Damage
Property may be damaged if it suffers permanent or temporary physical harm or permanent or temporary impairment of its use or value
R v Archer
Danger to Life
Danger to life of some person other than the setter of the fire
R v Smith
Loss
Assessed by the extent to which the complainant’s position prior to the offence has been diminished or impaired
R v Morley
Conspiracy
Not just the intention of two or more, but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act by unlawful means. The very plot is the act itself.
Mulcahy v R
Conspiracy
A conspiracy does not end with the making of the agreement. It remains in existence until completed or abandonment
R v Sanders
Conspiracy
When you can prove that a person conspired with other parties whose ID’s are unknown, that suspect can still be convicted
R v White
Conspiracy
It is sufficient if one act or omission forming necessary part of the offence happens in NZ
R v Sanders
Attempts
In assessing conduct there must be a full evaluation in terms of time, place and circumstances, not just preparation and proximity
R v Harpur
Legally impossible
When stolen property has been returned to the owner they are no longer deemed to be stolen and it is not an offence
Train station scenario
R v Donnelly
Parties
Where a main offender cannot be identified it is sufficient to prove each individual must have been a principle or party
R v Renata
Actual proof of assistance
It is unnecessary that the principle offender is aware that he is being assisted but there must be proof of actual assistance.
Larkins v Police
Special relationship
A person is morally bound to take active steps to save his children, by not doing so he becomes a secondary offender
R v Russell
Party to a secondary offence
An offence where no violence is contemplated and a principle offender uses violence the secondary offender taking no physical part in it would not be liable
R v Betts and Ridley
Drug dealing
Not necessary for the Crown to establish knowledge on behalf of the accused. In absence of evidence to the contrary knowledge on their part will be presumed.
R v Strawbridge
Drug Dealing
The serious offence of possessing a narcotic does not extend to some minute and useless amount.
Police v Emerali
Drug Dealing
To import includes to introduce or bring in from abroad or cause to be brought from a foreign country.
Saxton v Police
Drug dealing
Importation involves active conduct, it does not cease as the vessel enters NZ. The process exists from the time the goods enter NZ until they reach their immediate destination or cease to be under control of authorities.
R v Hancox
Drug Dealing
The words ‘produce’ and ‘manufacture’ inns 6(1)(b) broadly cover the creation of controlled drugs by some form of process which changes the original substances into a controlled drug
R v Rua
Drugs
An offer is an intimation by the person charged to another that he is ready on request to supply that other, drug prohibited by statute
R v During
Drugs
The making of such an intimation, with the intention that it should be understood as a genuine offer, is an offence.
R v Brown
The best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adduced by the prosecution in proof of the victims age.
R v Forrest and Forrest
Drugs - Proof of possession
Possession involved two elements, physical (actual/potential) and mental (knowledge of possession and intention to exercise possession)
R v Cox
Take away v detain
Seperate and distinct offences. First is complete when offender took woman again will. Second is holding her against her will.
R v Crossan
Detaining
An active construct, to keep in confinement or custody, not the passive construct of harbouring.
R v Pryce
Consent
Must be free, voluntary, free and informed and given by a person in a position to form rational judgement.
R v Cox
Intent in abduction
Offence committed at the time of taking away so long as at that moment there is the necessary intent.
R v Mohi
Kidnapping
Deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away from the place a victim wants to be
R v Wellard
Sexual violation
Genitalia comprise the reproductive organs, interior and exterior, vulva, labia interior and exterior at the opening of the vagina
R v Koroheke
Consent
To be effective consent must be real, genuine or true and conveyed by words, conduct or both
R v Cook
Consent
Full, voluntary and free and informed, freely and voluntarily given by a person in a position to form a rational judgment
R v Cox
Consent - objective test
Crown must prove no reasonable person in the accused shoes could have though the complainant was consenting
R v Gutuama
Force, threat or fear of force
Distinguish between consent freely given and submission by a woman to what she may regard as unwanted but unavoidable.
R v Koroheke
Conduct sufficiently proximate
Having regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point where the conduct stops, should be considered in its entirety
R v Harpur
Child cannot consent
Even in exceptional and rare circumstances even where she indicates agreement to the act, no reasonable adult would have grounds for believing that a 10 or 11 year old girl has the experience or maturity to understand the nature and significant of the act
Cox V R
Indecency means conduct that right thinking people will consider an affronts to the sexual modesty of the complainant.
R v Court
Indecency must be judged in light of time, place and circumstances. It must be something more than trifling.
R v Dunn
Indecent assault
Assault accompanied with circumstances of indecency.
R v Leeson
Uses or attempts to use
An unsuccessful use of a document is as much use as a successful one. An unsuccessful use must not be equated with an attempted one.
Hayes v R
Document
Essentially a document is a thing which provides evidence or information or serves as a record.
R v Misic
Intention to deceive
Requires that the deception is practised in order to deceive the affected party. Purposeful intent is necessary.
R v Morley
Pecuniary advantage
Anything which enhances the accused’s financial position.
Hayes v R
Valuable consideration
Anything capable of belong valuable consideration, whether or monetary kind or any other kind, money or money’s worth.
Hayes v R
Firearms
Whatever manner
Short of actually firing weapon
Police v Parker
Intent to shoot victim
Must show intent under 198(1)(a)
Not sufficient for reckless
R v Pekapo
Prima Facie - First appearance
Tuli v Police
