Robbery

Question 1

What offence is robbery and what’s the maximum sentence

Answer 1

It’s an indictable offence and maximum sentence is life

Question 2

What statute and section is robbery under

Answer 2

Theft act 1968, under section 8 (1)

Question 3

What statute and section is robbery under

Answer 3

Theft act 1968, under section 8 (1)

Question 4

What is robbery

Answer 4

‘a person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force’

Question 5

What is the actus reus

Answer 5

• Completed theft
• force or theft of force
• used immediately before or at the time
• force must be used to steal

Question 6

What’s the mens Rea of robbery

Answer 6

• Mens Rea for theft
• intend to use force to steal

Question 7

What does completed theft mean

Answer 7

Both the actus reus and mens rea of theft are present

Question 8

What’s the facts of R v Robinson 1977

Answer 8

D was owed £7 by the victim’s wife. He approached V with a knife and demanded money. When he went to collect the money, a fight developed between D and the V during which a £5 note dropped out of the V’s pocket.

Question 9

what’s held in R v Robinson1977

Answer 9

D picked it up and demanded the remaining £2 owed to him. D was convicted of robbery and appealed. why was the conviction quashed because D had a honest belief that he was entitled to the money. therefore D did not act dishonestly (mens rea) so no completed theft and no robbery

Question 10

what’s the fact of R v zerei 2012

Answer 10

D and another assaulted V and threatened him with a knife then took V’s car and drove off- the car was found abandoned 1km away

Question 11

what was held for R v zerie 2012

Answer 11

conviction held to be unsafe on appeal. it needed to be shown that intention to permanently deprive was present rather than merely forcible taking

Question 12

what’s the facts of Corcoran v Anderton 1980

Answer 12

Ds hit a woman in the back and tugged at her bag. she let go of the bag and it fell to the ground. Ds ran off without the bag

Question 13

what’s held for Corcoran v Anderton 1980

Answer 13

theft completed at the point the woman let go of the bag thus the Ds were guilty of robbery. it is not necessary for D to actually get away with the property.

Question 14

what are the 6 elements of force or threat of force

Answer 14

-prosecution must also prove force or threat of force
-can be explicit or implied by gestures
-no statutory or common law definition for force
-‘common sense’ of jury ‘ r v clouden 1987’
- level of force does not have to be substantial
-must be more than minimal and more than taking from a passive victim

Question 15

what’s facts of R v Dawson & James 1976

Answer 15

one of the D’s nudged a man so as it easier for the other D to take his wallet from his pocket

Question 16

what was held R v Dawson & James 1976

Answer 16

convictions was upheld. why?- the word force is to be given its ordinary meaning and requires no direction to the jury. the jury were entitled to find that force had been used

Question 17

what’s facts of R v Clouden 1987

Answer 17

D wrenched a shopping bag from a woman’s grasp. he did not physically touch the woman herself

Question 18

what’s held for R v CLouden 1987

Answer 18

it was held that the force used on the bag was sufficient to amount to force on a person because it was ‘wrenched from her hand’

Question 19

what’s the facts of R v DPP 2012

Answer 19

D snatched a cigarette from V’s hand without touching V in any way

Question 20

what was held for R v DPP 2012

Answer 20

it was held that, as there had been no direct contact, no force had been used on person- no guilty of robbery

Question 21

what’s the facts of B&R V DPP 2007

Answer 21

V was stopped by a group of schoolboys who surrounded him and took his mobile, watch and travel card, V said he did not feel threatened or scared

Question 22

what’s was held for B & R V DPP 2007

Answer 22

D’s was convicted of robbery and they had intended to threaten force in order to steal his possessions. robbery is also committed even of V is not frightened

Question 23

force must be what

Answer 23

be used or threatened immediately before or at the time of theft

Question 24

what’s the essence of robbery

Answer 24

it is that force is used to commit theft so there must be a causal link between the theft and the force used

Question 25

robbery can happen when

Answer 25

immediately before or at the of the theft which can be treated as ‘ongoing’

Question 26

what’s the facts of R V Hale 1978

Answer 26

D’s forced their way into V’s house. one put a hand over V’s mouth while the other went upstairs and took a jewellery box, then before leaving they tied V up

Question 27

what was held for in R V Hale 1979

Answer 27

force was used immediately before the theft when one D put their hand over V’s mouth. tying up V could also bee force in order to steal as theft was continuing

Question 28

whats the facts of R v Lockley 1995

Answer 28

D had stolen some cans of beer from an off-licence. he used force on the shop assistant who was trying to prevent him from leaving. D was convicted of robbery. he appealed on the basis that the was after the theft

Question 29

what was held for R v Lockley 1995

Answer 29

the appeal was dismissed on the basis that appropriation can be classed as a continuing act and it is for the jury to decide whether the theft is complete before the use of force

Question 30

force must be used to steal why

Answer 30

timing of when the theft is complete and timing of the use of the force is important. however, it is not necessary to actually get away with the property- Corcoran v Anderton 1980

Question 31

whats the facts of D v Vinall 2011

Answer 31

D punched V, knocking him off his bike and then chased after him. D then returned to the location of the attack, took the bike and abandoned it at a bus stop, D was convicted of robbery and appealed.

Question 32

what was held for D v Vinall 2011

Answer 32

D’s conviction for robbery was quashed as it could not be proved that at the time of punching V, D intended to use force in order to steal. the theft was connected with the force but was an afterthought