Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Criminal Law > EXAMS - MOST IMPORTANT > Flashcards

EXAMS - MOST IMPORTANT Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

What is each section of the Robbery offences and what are their aggravating factors? (Section numbers and key aggravating factor words)

A 
S94 - ROBBERY
.
.
S95 - (Aggravated) Robbery 
ROBBERY +
   \+ Corporal violence, or
   \+ Inflict ABH, or
   \+ Deprive liberty.
.
.
S96 - Robbery with wounding
ROBBERY +
   \+ GBH, or
   \+ Wounding.
.
.
S97 (1) - Armed Robbery 
ROBBERY +
(1) + Armed with offensive weapon, or
    \+ Armed with offence instrument, or
    \+ In company
.
.
S97 (2) - (Aggravated) Armed Robbery 
ROBBERY +
(2) + Armed with dangerous weapon (Firearm, prohibited        weapon or speargun)
.
.
S98 Armed Robbery with wounding
ROBBERY +
    \+ Armed with offensive weapon, or
    \+ Armed with offence instrument, or
    \+ In company
AND
   \+ GBH, or
   \+ Wounding.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

In a scenario involving the BLOGGS family robbers; Joe B, Mary B, Steven B and Adam B, they all agree and undertake a joint criminal enterprise to rob the Betoota Bank. Mary plans the robbery, Joe enters the Betoota bank with a gun and demands cash, Steven B parks a block away and keeps lookout, after Joe robs the bank he flees on foot to about 1km away where Adam B picks Joe up in his Mitsubishi Pajero and helps conceal the proceeds.

In this scenario what complicity is each person? And under what section of the Crimes Act does that complicity relate.

A

Mary B - Is a Accessory BEFORE the fact. (The mastermind) - Section 346 of the Crimes Act.

Joe B - Is a Principal in the FIRST degree - He is charged with the relevant offence. S97 Crimes Act - Robbery armed with a dangerous weapon.

Steven B - Is a Principal in the SECOND degree - Section 345 of the Crimes Act.

Adam B - Is a Accessory AFTER the fact - Section 347 of the Crimes Act.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Explain the case R V RYAN?

A

R v RYAN relates to an armed robbery; during which RYAN loaded and armed himself with a firearm, then tied up a victim during the robbery. RYAN had the firearm aimed at the victim’s head. When the victim turned around, RYAN suddenly pulled the trigger.

RYAN argued it was an involuntary action to pull the trigger and attempted the AUTOMATISM defence. But based on the facts that the accused had prepared himself, the firearm and put himself in that situation it was held that the acts of RYAN caused the victim’s death and was convicted of murder.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the proofs for S 254 Crimes Act, Using false document?

A

Using false document;

A person who USES a false document, knowing that it is false, with the intention of:

(a) inducing some person to accept it as genuine, and
(b) because of its being accepted as genuine:
(i) obtaining any property belonging to another, or
(ii) obtaining any financial advantage or causing any financial disadvantage, or
(iii) influencing the exercise of a public duty,

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the proofs for S 253 Crimes Act, Forgery – making false document?

A

Making false document;

A person who MAKES a false document with the intention that the person or another will use it:

(a) to induce some person to accept it as genuine, and
(b) because of its being accepted as genuine:
(i) to obtain any property belonging to another, or
(ii) to obtain any financial advantage or cause any financial disadvantage, or
(iii) to influence the exercise of a public duty,

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the elements of Possession of identification information in accordance with S192K of the Crimes Act?

A
  • A person who possesses identification information
  • With the INTENTION of committing or of facilitating
  • The commission of an indictable offence

Proved through admissions, dealing act – Need to prove the intent.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What does indentification information mean in accordance with 192I

(11 types)

Try acronym: P. - C.A.B. - V.A.N.D.A.L.S

A

P - (d) a passport or passport number,

C - (g) a Credit or debit card, its number or data stored or encrypted on it,
A - (h) a financial Account number, user name or password,
B (e) Biometric data,

V - (f) a Voice print,
A - (a) a Address or name,
N - (j) a series of Numbers or letters (or both) intended for use as a means of personal identification,
D - (b) a Date or place of birth, marital status, relative’s identity or similar information,
A - (k) an ABN.
L - (c) a driver Licence or driver licence number,
S - (i) a digital signature,

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is Embezzlement?

A

S157 Crimes Act - Before the Till

  • Received the property
  • before coming into the possession of the master/employer
  • Stole the property
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What is Larceny as a clerk or servent?

A

Section 156 Crimes Act – Larceny as a clerk or servant (After the till)

  • Accused is a clerk or servant
  • Property was owned or in possession of master/employer
  • The accused stole the property from the master/employer
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is the Definition and Extended Definition of Supply prohibited drug?

A 
Supply;
DEFINITION
Includes;
- Sell and distribute, 
- agree to supply, 
- offer to supply, 
- keeping or having in possession to supply, 
- delivering or receiving for supply, or
- authorising, 
- directing, 
- causing suffering, 
- permitting or 
- attempting any of those acts or things.

EXTENDED DEFINTION
- Intention required; The suspects intention that the OFFER to be REGARDED AS GENUINE by the PERSON RECEIVING the OFFER.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

To satisfy ‘Cultivation’ with regards to a prohibited plant; what types of cultivation evidence do we need?

A
  • Involves the sowing of seeds
  • Planting, growing, tending to, nurture, watering
  • Harvesting of prohibited plant.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

In accordance with section 25A of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking act; what are the proofs of ON-GOING SUPPLY?

A 
On going supply. 
- The supply of a prohibited drug 3 or more times,
 - Within a consecutive 30 days,
-  For financial or material reward. 
(Can't be cannabis)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Describe the case law result regarding R v HAMZY?

A

Case law; which indicates where a number of acts are involved, the series of incidents of at the same nature can be accumulated into one indictment.

In this case regarding drug supply; the quantities for each act of supply were accumulated from individual amount to establish a commercial qauntity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

In accordance with section 25 of Drugs Misuse and Trafficking act; what are the proofs of SUPPLY PROHIBITED DRUG?

A

Supply prohibited drug

  • The accused
  • Did supply
  • A prohibited drug.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Describe the case law result regarding R v FILIPETTI?

A

Case law; which indicates the accused required exclusive physical control to be convicted of a prohibited drug.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the case law result regarding R v HE KAW TAY.

A

Case law; which states the accused MUST KNOW THE EXISTENCE or THE LIKELY EXISTENCE and nature of the narcotic goods.

Onus is on the prosecution to prove the accused had this at the time of having physical control.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What are the elements for aggravated sexual assault in company S61JA of the crimes act?

A

1) had sexual intercourse with the complainant;
2) without the consent of the complainant;
3) knowing that the complainant did not consent; and
4) who was in the company of another or others; and
who either:
o Intentionally or recklessly inflicts ABH or
o Threatens to inflict ABH by offensive weapon or instrument
o Deprives the alleged victim of their liberty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

In accordance with Section 61H of the Crimes Act what is the definition of Sexual Intercourse?

A

Section 61H of the Crimes Act;
Sexual Intercourse means;

SEXUAL CONNECTION occasioned by penetration to any of the;

a) Genitalia (including surgically constructed vagina) of a female,
OR
- The anus of any person,

+

i) By any part of the body of another person,
OR
ii) Any object manipulated by another person,
- Except where carried out for proper medical purposes,

OR

b) Sexual connection occasioned by introduction of penis to mouth of another person
c) Cunnilingus, or
d) The continuation of sexual intercourse

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What are the three types of a CONSTRUCTIVE break with regards to a break and enter offence?

A
  • Threat
  • Fraud
  • Conspiracy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What are the two types of breaks with regards to a break and enter offence?

A
  • ACTUAL

- CONSTRUCTIVE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What are the circumstances of Aggravation for a Break and Enter as defined in section 105A of the Crimes Act?

(6 circumstances)

A
  • Armed with offensive weapon
  • In company
  • Use corporal violence
  • Intentionally or recklessly inflicts ABH
  • Deprives a person of their liberty
  • Knows persons present at the time
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What are the circumstances of Special Aggravation for a break and enter as defined in section 105A of the Crimes Act?

(3 circumstances)

A
  • Intentionally wounds or inflicts GBH on any person.
  • Inflicts GBH and is reckless to inflicting ABH.
  • Armed with a dangerous weapon.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What is the section and proofs of Break, Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence?

A 
S112 Crimes Act
A) The accused
-Break
-Enters
-Dwelling House or other building
-Commits serious indictable offence therein.

B) The accused

  • Being in dwelling or other building
  • Commits serious indictable offence therein,
  • And breaks out
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What are the special aggravating factors of kidnapping? 86(3) Crimes Act 1900

(2 required criteria)

A

a) IN COMPANY of another person or persons,

AND

b) At the time of, or immediately before or after the commission of the offence, ACTUAL BODILY HARM is occasioned to the victim.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What are the proofs of kidnapping in accordance with Section 86 of the Crimes Act?

A

Section 86 Crimes Act - Kidnapping

1) A person who takes or detains a person without the person’s consent;

a) With the intention to hold her or him to RANSOM; or
b) With the intention committing a SERIOUS INDICTABLE OFFENCE; or
c) With the intention of obtaining any other ADVANTAGE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

When considering a reckless charge in accordance with section 35 of the Crimes Act for GBH or wounding; what must we establish the accused had in their mind at the time of their actions?

A
  • A foresight of POSSIBLE injury.

The onus is lower than for murder or manslaughter, which stipulates a foresight of PROBABLE death or GBH.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What are the 7 lawful excuses to assault?

A
  • Lawful chastisement
  • Self defence
  • Lawful arrest
  • Medical examination
  • Accidental physical force
  • Body decoration
  • Sport and other physical contests
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What are the elements of discharge firearm with intent - in accordance with section 33A of the Crimes Act?

A

Discharge any firearm or loaded arms
- Attempts to discharge any firearm or other loaded arms.
- With intent to cause gbh
OR
- With intent to resist or prevent his or her lawful arrest or detention.

29
Q

What is Grievous bodily harm?

A

GBH an act causing serious and permanent injury or serious disfigurement of a person.

30
Q

What is actual bodily harm?

A
  • Any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of another.
  • It need not be permanent or amount to GBH
  • Psychiatric injury amounts to abh (Chan Gook)
31
Q

What are the correct sections in the Crimes Act, for the following offences;

  • Common assault
  • Assault police
  • Assault occasioning abh
  • Reckless wounding/GBH
  • Wounding or GBH with intent
A 
S61 - Common assault
S60 - Assault police
S59 - Assault occasioning abh
S35 - Reckless wounding/GBH
S33 - Wounding or GBH with intent
32
Q

What is the definition of a wound?

A

The whole skin must be broken - the dermis and epidermis.

33
Q

What is a ‘dangerous weapon’ as defined is S4 of the Crimes Act?

A
  • A firearm
  • A prohibited weapon
  • A speargun
34
Q

What is the defence of claim of right?

A
  • Honest claim (subjective test) the defendant honestly believes they were entitled to the property. (based on facts not law),AND
  • The belief must be one as to legal entitlement (objective test) Complete defence to mens rea offences. Usually property/fraud type matters.

(COMPLETE defence to Mens Rea offences (typically with a dishonesty element)

35
Q

What is the 3 criteria required for property that can be stolen at common law larceny?

A
  • Tangible
  • Personal
  • Some value, need not be a dollar value
36
Q

What is continuous possession?

A

There is a concept of continuing trespass where the taking, or original possession is obtained wrongfully, even though not feloniously, and the accused later misappropriates the goods. This CAN constitute larceny.
R v RILEY

37
Q

In order to satisfy an assault police based charge, what must the police officer be doing?

A

S60 The police officer must be acting in the execution of the officer’s duty.

38
Q

What are the 9 Criminal defences?

​ P.A.N.I.C. D.I.S.S.

A 
P - Provocation
A - Automatism
N - Necessity
I- Insanity
C - Claim of right

D - Duress
I - Intoxication
S - Substantial impairment
S - Self Defence

39
Q

In accordance with the Intoxication defence, Section 428C; allows evidence of intoxication to be taken into account in SPECIFIC INTENT OFFENCES. Such evidence CANNOT be taken into account on what occasions?

A

For SPECIFIC INTENT OFFENCES;

a) If the person had resolved before becoming intoxicated to do the particular act, or
b) Became intoxicated to strengthen his or her resolve to do the relevant conduct.

40
Q

What is the defence of extreme provocation?

S23 Crimes Act 1900

A

1) This requires a TRIGGER ACT being an SIO.
2) As the ACT OF EXTREME PROVOCATION from the deceased.
3) That TRIGGER ACT caused the accused to lose SELF CONTROL.
4) And the conduct of the deceased could have caused an ordinary person to lose SELF CONTROL to the extent of intending to kill or inflict GBH on the deceased.

  • PARTIAL defence to Murder only.
  • Reduces Murder to Manslaughter.
41
Q

What is the defence of Substantial impairment by an abnormality of the mind?
Section 23A Crimes Act

A

Substantial impairment-
Previously known as Diminished responsibility.

It is aPARTIAL DEFENCE to MURDER ONLY. And reduces murder to manslaughter.

The accused must show at the TIME OF DEATH;
a)The persons capacity to understand events, or
b) To judge whether the persons actions were right or wrong, or
c) To control themselves,
Was substantiallyimpaired by an abnormality of the mind arising from an underlying condition.
The impairment must be substantial to justify reducing murder to manslaughter.

42
Q

What two elements form thetest for self defence?

A

1) - SUBJECTIVE (In the mind of the accused): Is there a reasonable possibility that the accused believed that their conduct was necessary in order to defend themselves?
(Typically dependant on admissions,evidence of preperation or circumstantial evidence, includingexcessive acts;to negate)

  • OBJECTIVE (Would a reasonable 3rd person thought similarly): Is there a reasonable possibility that what the accused did was a reasonable response to the circumstances as he or she percieved them?
    (Inquiries and evidencecan be used to refute whether their acts could be considered reasonable in those circumstances)
43
Q

Explain the case R V TAKTAK ?

A

Having regard to duty of care; Where TAK TAK had voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent another from rendering aid.

The accused took a female who had overdosed on heroin, thereby preventing her from obtaining medical treatment. In the morning she was dead.

44
Q

What are the three heads of murder?

A
  • INTENTIONAL (with INTENT TO KILL or INFLICT GBH)
  • RECKLESS (was done or omitted with RECKLESS INDIFFERENCE to human life)
  • FELONY (done in an attempt to commit, or during or immediately after the commission, by the accused, or some other accomplice with him, of a CRIME PUNISHABLE BY PENAL SERVITUDE FOR LIFE OR FOR 25 YEARS)
45
Q

What is a reckless murder?

Reference Crabbe’s case.

A

The actions of the accused were PROBABLE to result in death (Crabbe’s Case). A possibility is insufficient; the accused must force that death will PROBABLY result from their actions.

NO NEED TO PROVE INTENT TO KILL

46
Q

Explain the result of HALLET’s case?

A

HALLET assault the victim and left the victim unconscious on the beach. The tide rose and the victim was later found dead. The causation was found to be due to the acts of the accused.

Defence argued the tide rising was a ‘nous actus interveniens’ (NEW INTERVENING ACT) which supervened and took over of the leading cause of death. This was Rejected.

To break the causal chain defence must establish on the balance of probabilities that the novus actus interveniens (intervening Act) is SUBSTANTIAL so EXTRAORDINARY to happen to break the chain of causation (eg/an act of god)

47
Q

What the elements for murder in accordance with section 18 of the Crimes Act?

A

1) - (DEATH OF A PERSON) - The death of the deceased, being a human being.

2) - (CAUSATION OF DEATH) - An unlawful act or omission of the accused which caused the death.
(Actus Reus)

3) - (INTENT TO MURDER) - Such act or omission was done or committed to be don with -
i) reckless indifference to human life
ii) intent to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm
iii) in an attempt to commit, or during, or immediately after the commission by the accused, or by some accomplice with him, of a crime punishable by penal servitude for life or 25 years.
(Mens Rea)

48
Q

What is the Prima Facie test for causation?

A

The BUT FOR test.

BUT FOR the actions of the accused, the victim would not have died. This test is a tool used by the courts to when determine whether a causal link or nexus exists between the accused’s actions and the death of the victim.

49
Q

What are some examples of a foundational Crimes with regards to a Felony Murder

A

Crimes punishable by 25 years or life in prison
S33 discharging firearm etc with intent.

S61JA aggravated sexual assault in company

S66 sexual intercourse child under 10

S96- robbery with wounding

S98 robbery with arms etc and wounding

S112(3) Special aggravated break and enter.

S198 Destroying or damaging property with intention of endangering life

50
Q

What is transferred malice?

A

The mens rea from one offence can be transferred to another - DOCTRINE OF TRANSFERRED MALICE.

51
Q

What is Crabbe’s case?

A

Common law precedent test for RECKLESSNESS in regards to murder. The High Court of Australia ruled that to be guilty of murder, the defendant can be RECKLESS in that they did the act knowing it was PROBABLE (meaning a substantial or real chance) that death or grievous bodily harm would occur as a result of their actions. Not just possible

THE ACCUSED MUST FORSEE THAT DEATH WILL PROBABLY RESULT FROM THE ACCUSED’S ACTIONS.

52
Q

What is a novus actus interveniens’?

A

It is a NEW INTERVENING ACT - which is something that supervenes and takes over as the dominant cause of injury or death.

This means the defence will argue some other act caused the death and not the actions of the accused if they can do this actus reus will not be established = no offence.

53
Q

What is causation and the test for it?

A

This element relates to the Actus Reus or the physical doing of the criminal act.

It is assessed OBJECTIVELY without reference to the state of mind of the accused.

The BUT FOR test is applied to help determine if the accused person’s acts were the causation of the victim injuries or death.

54
Q

Explain ROYALL’s case?

A

ROYALL assaulted his girlfriend. To escape; she jumped out of a window to her death. He was found guilty of her murder.

The accused will have caused the death if the victim’s fear was WELL-FOUND or REASONABLE, and their escape a NATURAL CONSEQUENCE of the accused’s behaviour.

55
Q

What is a voluntary manslaughter?

A

This is where there is a killing, which at prima facie amounts to murder but is reduced to manslaughter by reason of mitigating circumstances;

  • Extreme Provocation
  • Substantial abnormality of the mind.
  • Infanticide - 22A the killing of a child under 12 months by mother suffering from PND
56
Q

What is involuntary manslaughter?

A

Under this heading there is no prima facie evidence of murder. Here there is lesser mens rea than required for murder.

1) The death of a person was caused by an act of the accused.
2) The act was both,
a) UNLAWFUL, and
b) DANGEROUS.

57
Q

What are the two types of involuntary manslaughter?

A

There are two types of involuntary manslaughter, they are;

  • Act or omission by gross negligence, or
    (Criminal Negligence, Gross Negligence, Duty of Care)
  • An act which is unlawful and dangerous.
58
Q

What are the proofs of Hindering Investigation in accordance with section 315 of the Crimes Act?

A

Hindering Investigation: (Unlawful action)

(1) A person who does anything intending in any way to hinder:
(a) the investigation of a serious indictable offence committed by another person, or
(b) the discovery of evidence concerning a serious indictable offence committed by another person, or
(c) the apprehension of another person who has committed a serious indictable offence,

59
Q

Who has the power to permit a charge of Perjury?

A

The Attorney General or director of the ODPP.

60
Q

What are the proofs of Conceal Serious indictable offence in accordance with section 316 of the Crimes Act?

A

Conceal Serious offence: (Unlawful inaction)

1) Withholding, without reasonable excuse, information where;
a) A crime has been committed by another person, and
b) It is in fact an SIO, and
c) The holder of the information either knows or believes that the facts that exist have attracted or might well attract police attention.

61
Q

What is a riot in accordance with Section 93B - Crimes Act 1900?

A

Section 93B - Crimes Act 1900
1) Where 12 or more persons who are present, together use or threaten unlawful violence for a common purpose and the conduct of them (taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his or her personal safety, each of the persons using unlawful violence for the common purpose is guilty of riot and liable to imprisonment for 15 years.

2) It is immaterial whether or not the 12 or more persons use to threaten unlawful violence simultaneously.
3) The common purpose may be inferred from conduct.
4) No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be likely to be present at the scene.
5) Riot may be committed in private as well as in public places.

62
Q

What is an affray in accordance with Section 93C - Crimes Act 1900?

A

Section 93C - Crimes Act 1900
1) A person who uses or threatens unlawful violence towards another and whose conduct is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his or her personal safety is guilty of affray and liable to imprisonment for 10 years.

2) If 2 or more persons use or threaten the unlawful violence, it is the conduct of them taken together that must be considered for the purposes of subsection 1).
3) For the purposes of this section, a threat cannot be made by the use of words alone.
4) No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be likely to be, present at the scene.
5) Affray may be committed in private as well in public places.

63
Q

What are the proofs of Dangerous Driving occasioning death in accordance with section 52A (1) of the Crimes Act?

A

(1) Dangerous driving occasioning death
- Driver of a vehicle
- Occasioned death of another person,
- At the time the driver was
(a) under the influence of intoxicating liquor or of a drug, or
(b) at a speed dangerous to another person or persons, or
(c) in a manner dangerous to another person or persons.

64
Q

What are the 4 circumstances of aggravation for Dangerous Driving occasioning death?

A

52A (7)

a) high range PCA
b) 45+kmph over the speed limit.
c) Escaping police in pursuit.
d) Substantially impair by drug or combination of drugs

65
Q

What are the 3 defences for Dangerous Driving occasioning death in accordance with S52A (8)

A

(8)
The death or GBH was not in any way attributable to
(a) driver under the influence alcohol or drugs,
(b) speed dangerous
(c) manner dangerous

66
Q

With regards to Dangerous Driving, what is the case of R v JIMINEZ?

A

JIMINEZ drove after 4 hours sleep on a stretch of highway that curved. JIMINEZ fell asleep and continued travelling straight into a tree. His passenger was ejected and killed on impact with a tree.

On appeal the court determined that driving was a voluntary act; and at the time of falling asleep JIMINEZ was NOT driving the vehicle. Charges of dangerous driving were dismissed.

67
Q

What are the proofs of Dishonestly destroying or damaging property in accordance with S197 of the Crimes Act?

A

(1) - A person who dishonestly,
- With a view to making a gain for that person or another, - Destroys or damages property is liable:

(a) to imprisonment for 7 years, or
(b) if the destruction or damage is caused by means of fire or explosives, to imprisonment for 14 years.

68
Q

What are the following sections in accordance with the Crimes Act 1900? (Titles of the sections)

S18 -
S33 - 
S33A -
S35 - 
S35A -
S52 - 
S59 - 
S60 - 
S61 - 
S61H - 
S61i -
S61J -
S61JA -
S86(1) -
S86(2) -
S93 B) -
S93 C) -
S94 -
S95 -
S96 - 
S97(1) - 
S97(2) -
S98 -
S112 (1) -
S112 (2) - 
S112 (3) - 
S117-
S156 -
S157 - 
S192E -
S192i - 
S192K -
S197 -
S253 -
S254 - 
S315 - 
S316 - 
S344 - 
S345 -
S346 -
S347 -
A

Crimes Act 1900;
S18 - Murder / Manslaughter
S33 - Wounding / GBH with intent
S33A - Discharge firearm
S35 - Reckless wounding / GBH
S35A - Cause dog to inflict GBH or ABH
S52 - Dangerous driving occasioning death
S59 - Assault ABH
S60 - Assault police
S61 - Common assault
S61H - Definition of sexual intercourse
S61i - Sexual intercourse without consent
S61J - Sexual intercourse without consent, in company
S61JA - Aggravated Sexual Intercourse without consent, in company
S86(1) - Kidnapping
S86(2) - Aggravated Kidnapping
S93 B) - Riot
S93 C) - Affray
S94 - Robbery
S95 - Aggravated robbery
S96 - Robbery with wounding/GBH
S97(1) - Armed Robbery
S97(2) - Aggravated Armed Robbery
S98 - Armed Robbery with wounding/GBH
S112 (1) - Break enter and commit serious indictable offence
S112 (2) - Aggravated Break enter and commit serious indictable offence
S112 (3) - Special Aggravated Break enter and commit serious indictable offence
S117- Larceny (punishment - proofs at common law)
S156 - Larceny as clerk or servant
S157 - Embezzlement
S192E - Fraud
S192i - Definition of identification information
S192K - Possess identification information with intent
S197 - Dishonestly destroy or damage property
S253 - Make false document
S254 - Use false document
S315 - Hinder investigation
S316 - Concealing SIO
S344 - Attempts
S345 - Principal in 2nd degree
S346 - Accessory before the fact
S347 - Accessory after the fact

69
Q

What is the key subject of each of the following cases? (One word or sentence)

  • R v Joyce;
  • R v Brougham
  • R v Button and Griffen
  • R v Eagleton
  • R v He Kaw Tay
  • R v Filipetti
  • R v Crabbe
  • R v Tak Tak
  • R v Royall
  • R v Ryan
  • R v Hallet
  • R v Hamzy
  • R v Jiminez
A
  • R v Joyce: physical presence is not enough for joint criminal enterprise.
  • R v Brougham: victim facing combined strength of 2 persons may be enough for common purpose.
  • R v Button and Griffen: Physical proximity required to embolden or assist.
  • R v Eagleton: re attempts - acts must be proximate with the offence.
  • R v He Kaw Tay: Must prove knowledge of possession.
  • R v Filipetti: Must prove exclusive possession.
  • R v Crabbe: Forsight of Probable death or GBH required for reckless murder.
  • R v Tak Tak: assuming duty of care & precluding deceased from medical aid amounts to gross negligence for manslaughter.
  • R v Royall: Assaulting victim to point of reasonable fear to jump out window to her death amounted to murder.
  • R v Ryan: Planned and prepared himself into situation, then pulled trigger. Murder confirmed and automatism denied.
  • R v Hallet: rising tide was not novus actus interveniens for the assault causation of death.
  • R v Hamzy : Any series of indictments rolled into one to appropriately reflect criminality.
  • R v Jiminez : Driving is voluntary and falling asleep is not driving.

Criminal Law (20 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions