Criminal Law Flashcards
Theft
Theft is defined in S.1 Theft Act 1968, Each part of the definition is dealt with in sections 2-6 of the Theft Act 1968:
S.2 - dishonestly (MR)
S.3 - appropriates (AR)
S.4 - property (AR)
S.5 - belonging to another (AR)
S.6 - with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it (MR)
Actus Reus: Appropriating (A) property (P) belonging to another (BTA).
1) A - defined in S.3(1) as ‘any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner’.
- D must have taken an item and treated it as their own. They do not have to assume all the rights, just any (R v Morris).
- D does not have to ‘get away’ with the property (Corcoran v Anderton).
- A includes the right to sell (Pitham and Hehl).
- Consent is irrelevant to A. If D has been given consent by the owner of the property to take it, it is still A (Lawrence).
- If an item is a gift is irrelevant, it is still A (Hinks).
2) P - defined in S 4 and includes money and all other property real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property S.4 (1)
• Money: Simply cash or notes
•Real property: Land or buildings
• Personal property: For example, a phone, car, book
• Things in action: Something not physical but can be claimed by legal action. It is the right itself which is property, for example a bank account or a ticket giving a right to a theatre, concert or a football match
- You cannot steal:
Confidential information (Oxford v Moss)
Plants/ flowers S 4(3)
Animals S 4(4)
3) BTA - Under S.5 (1) P belongs to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest’.
- Possession or control: The owner of P usually has possession and control of it, but there are many other situations in which a person or different persons can have either possession or control.
- A legal owner may be found guilty of appropriating his own property (R v Turner).
- Lost/abandoned property:
You cannot steal property which doesn’t belong to anybody.
- S 5(3) Where property is received under an obligation: The P remains belonging to another, and if the property is not dealt with in the particular way this can be theft (Davidge v Bunnett).
- S 5(4) Where property is received by mistake: The P remains belonging to another.
Mens Rea: Dishonesty (Dis) with intention to permanently deprive (IPD).
Dis - The Act does not define ‘dishonesty’. But S 2 does state three situations where D’s behaviour is NOT considered to be dishonest. This is where he genuinely believes:
• S 2 (1) (a) He has in law the right to permanently deprive the other of it
•S 2 (1) (b) He would have the others consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances
• S 2 (1) (c) The person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps
All three situations depend on the DEFENDANTS BELIEF. It does not matter whether it is correct or reasonable.
a) A belief in the right to permanently deprive
Holden (1991).
b) A belief in the ‘others consent.
c) Belief that the owner cannot be discovered (Small 1988).
Dis and the ‘Ivey’ Test:
IPD - Defined in S 6 having intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of’.
Dispose of can mean: “To deal with definitively: to get rid of; to get done with, finish. To make over by way of sale or bargain or sell.”
‘Dispose of can also include ‘dealing with’ property as in DPP v Lavender (1994).
- A person can have IPD even if they intend to replace it later: Velumyl (1989).
Borrowing and lending S 6(1):
Borrowing would normally not be intending to deprive permanently. However, if the ‘goodness, virtue and practical value’ has gone out of the article, this would amount to an intention to permanently deprive: R v Lloyd (1985).
S 5(4) Where property obtained by a mistake S.5(4)
Where a person gets property by another’s mistake and is under an obligation to make restoration…… intention not to make restoration shall be regarded as an intention to deprive
A-G’s Reference (No 1 of 198 (1985).
Robbery
Robbery is defined in S.8 (1) Theft Act 1968.
Actus Reus: The use or threat of force on any person immediately before or at the time of the theft in order to steal.
4 Parts:
1. Theft (appropriation of property belonging to another)
2. Threat of or use of force
3. On any person in order to steal
4. Immediately before or at the time of the theft
- Theft (T) - T must be complete. If any elements of theft are missing there would be no offence of robbery (Robinson).
Attempt
Defined in S.1 Criminal Attempts Act (1981)
AR: D must commit an act which is more than merely preparatory (MTMP) to the commission of the full offence.
- An act is merely preparatory (MP) if D didn’t embark on the crime proper (R v Gullefer).
- If D is still preparing it is MP (R v Campbell).
- An act is MP if they do not try to actually commit the offence (R v Geddes).
- If D has carried out a sufficient series of acts it is more than merely preparatory (MTMP)
(R.v Boyle and Boyle). - If the only thing left to do is commit the last possible act before committing the full offence, it is MTMP (R v Jones).
MR: intention to commit the full offence.
• If it cannot be proven D had the full intention for the full offence, they are not guilty of attempt (Easom (1971)
• Conditional intent is sufficient (AG Ref No’s 1 & 2 of 1979) (1979)
Recklessness
R is not sufficient for the MR even if it is so for the full offence. BUT, it can be sufficient in relation to one part of it:
AG Ref No 3 of 1992 (1994).
Attempted murder
For attempted murder, the prosecution must prove intention to kill. Intention to cause GBH is not enough.
Whybrow (1951)
Intention and impossibility
S 1 (2) a person may be guilty of attempting to commit an offence even though it is impossible to commit
S 1(3) If the facts are as he believed them to be… he shall be regarded as having intention to commit that offence
