Part 2: Robbery Flashcards

1
Q

Section 234, Crimes Act 1961
Robbery

A

(1) Robbery is theft accompanied by violence or threats of violence, to any person or property, used to extort the property stolen or to prevent or overcome resistance to its being stolen.

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

Define Theft: S219 CA

Define: Dishonestly

Without claim of right.

A

dishonestly and without claim of right, taking any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property.

Dishonestly: an act done without a belief there was express or implied consent, or authority for, the act or omission from a person entitled to give consent or authority

WCOR - a belief at the time of the act in a proprietary or possessory right in property in relation the offence

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

Discuss the claim of right defence using R v Skivington

honest belief that a man has a claim of right

A

R v Skivington
Theft is an element of robbery, and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right is a defence to theft, then it negatives one of the elements of robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made out.”

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

Outline ‘Taking’ using R v Lapier
Robbery is complete

Outline ‘Possession’ using R v Cox

A

R v Lapier
Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary.

R v Cox
Possession involves two elements. The physical element, is actual or potential physical custody or control. The second, the mental element, is a combination of knowledge and intention.

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

What does R v Maihi state regarding theft being accompanied by violence.

“It is implicit in ‘accompany’

A

R v Maihi
“It is implicit in ‘accompany’ that there must be a nexus between the act of stealing and a threat of violence. Both must be present. However does not require that they be contemporaneous”

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

Explain Peneha v Police

Sufficient if the defendants actions forcibly interfere with PF, FP VAM producing MPE BID

A

Peneha v Police
Sufficient if the defendants actions forcibly interfere with personal freedom or amount to forcible powerful or violent action or motion producing a powerful effect tending to cause bodily injury or discomfort”.

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

Define : Threats of violence

A

The manifestation of an intention to inflict violence.

May be direct or veiled.

Conveyed by words or conduct, or both.

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

Section 235, Crimes Act 1961
Aggravated robbery

A

Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who—
(a) robs any person and, at the time of, or immediately before or immediately after, the robbery, causes grievous bodily harm to any person; or

(b) being together with any other person/s, robs any person; or

(c) being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument, robs any other person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Grievous bodily harm - DDP v Smith

A

“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Being together with

Explain R v Galey

A

Must be proof that the defendant was part of a joint enterprise by two or more persons who were physically present at the robbery. Each must share an intent - active part in the robbery

R v Galey
“Being together” involves “two or more having the common intention to use their combined force, either in any event or as circumstances might require, directly in the perpetration of the crime.”

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

Physical proximity:

The term “together with” requires that two or more people are actually present and acting together in the commission of the robbery.
Explain R v Joyce on Pyshical Proximity

A

“The Crown must establish that at least two persons were physically present at the time the robbery was committed or the assault occurred.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

The term “offensive weapon” is defined in s202A

A

Any article made or altered for use for causing bodily injury, or intended by the person having it with him for such use.

Any article capable of being used for causing bodily injury.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Section 236, Crimes Act 1961
Assault with intent to rob

A

(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who, with intent to rob any person,—
(a) causes grievous bodily harm to that person or any other person; or

(b) being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument, assaults that person or any other person; or

(c) being together with any other person/s, assaults that person or any other person.

(2) Every one who assaults any person with intent to rob that person/s is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years.

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

Define Assault

A

‘assault’ means:
the act of intentionally applying or attempting to apply force to another person, directly or indirectly,

or threatening by any act or gesture to apply such force to another person, if the person making the threat has, or causes the other to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose.

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