Robbery Flashcards
Robbery
dihonesty and against the person, ‘ theft achieved through personal violence or threat of violence’; assault and robbery are often charged together;a court may convict of theft if charged of robbery
Cromar v HMA 1987
bag with money , held onto the bag degree of personal violence, individual grabbed man’s bag containing money, held onto his bag until the straps snapped, accused appealed to say it was theft, not robbery (failed)bag with money , held onto the bag degree of personal violence
Harrison v Jessop 1992
landlord let out property to make a business, renters did not keep payments, landlord locked premises and took money from till, robbery
O’Neill v HMA 1934
=> Handbag stolen from old lady
=> Old lady falls and cuts face
=> Unsure as to whether robber tripped her or she fell from the shock
=> Held as robbery
ROBBERY HMA v Fegen - followed
James Fegen 1838
A pannel having obtained possession of a watch by a sudden snatch which broke the guard chain, and the party assaulted having at the same moment fallen, either from being tripped, or accidentally,—held that there was a sufficient amount of violence to constitute the crime of robbery.
Flynn v HMA 1995
A pannel having obtained possession of a watch by a sudden snatch which broke the guard chain, and the party assaulted having at the same moment fallen, either from being tripped, or accidentally,—held that there was a sufficient amount of violence to constitute the crime of robbery.
Cannon v HMA 200
C was convicted for assaulting and robbing an elderly lady, E, in her home. C’s co-accused, J, who had actually carried out the assault, stated that C had threatened him and told him to rob E. C appealed.
Held, allowing the appeal, that there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction for assault and robbery. C’s statement to police was that he waited outside after telling J to go in and take E’s purse. Even if it could be inferred that C went into the house, mere proximity to commission of the crime, and possession of the proceeds, were not sufficient to allow conviction. Conviction for theft was substituted. Opinion of the Court per Lord Rodger, Lord Justice General.
Morrison v HMA 2010
the accused was chrged with assault, convicting him only of robbery the victim was intoxicated at the time of attack evidence - vague It was held that violence had still been used in effecting the theft and this was all that was necessary
