Robbery Flashcards

1
Q

R v Skivington (Claim of right)

A

“Larceny [or theft] is an element of robbery, and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right is a defence to larceny, then it negatives one of the elements in the offence 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
2
Q

R v Lapier (Taking)

A

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

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

R v Cox (Possession)

A

Possession involves two elements.

The first, often called the physical element,

is actual or potential physical custody or control.

The second, often described as the mental element …

is a combination of knowledge and intention:

knowledge in the sense of an awareness by the accused

that the substance is in his possession …

and an intention to exercise possession.

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

R v Maihi (connection between theft and violence)

A

“It is implicit in ‘accompany’ that there must be a nexus (connection or link) between the act of stealing … and a threat of violence. Both must be present.” However the term “does not require that the act of stealing and the threat of violence be contemporaneous …”

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

Peneha v Police (force used in violence sufficient)

A

It is sufficient that

“the actions of the defendant

forcibly interfere with

personal freedom

or

(the actions of the defendant)

amount to forcible,

powerful or violent motion,

tending to cause

bodily injury or discomfort”.

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

R v Broughton (threat of violence)

A

A threat of violence is “the manifestation of an intention to inflict violence unless the money or property be handed over. The threat may be direct or veiled. It may be conveyed by words or conduct, or a combination of both.”

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

R v Joyce (together with)

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
8
Q

R v Galey (being together intention)

A

“Being together” in the context of section 235(b) involves

“two or more persons 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.”

  • two or more persons
  • common intention
  • combined force,
  • any event or as circumstances
  • perpetration of the crime.”
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Robbery

Section 234, Crimes Act 1961

A

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 it’s being stolen.

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

Theft

Section 219, (1)(a)(b)Crimes Act 1961

A
a. 
Dishonestly and without claim of right, 
takes any property 
with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property OR 
of any interest in that property

b. Dishonestly and without claim of right, using or dealing with any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property after obtaining possession of, or control over the property in whatever manner.

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

Dishonestly

A

Without permission or Authority

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

Claim of Right

A

A belief at the time of the act in a proprietary or possessory right in property in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed, although that belief may be based on ignorance or mistake of fact or of any matter of law other the the enactment against which the offence is alleged to have been committed.

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

Define “control”

A

To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over something.

A person can control an item that is not in their physical custody, and conversely can have something in their physical custody that they have no control over.

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

Define “property”

A

Property includes real and personal property, and any estate or interest in any real or personal property, (money, electricity) and any debt, and anything in action, and any other right of interest.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Intent to deprive owner permanently

A

An intent to deal with property in such a manner that:

a. the property cannot be returned to any owner in the same condition, or
b. Any owner is likely to be permanently deprived of the property or of any interest in the property.

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

What is” intent”?

A

In criminal law context there are 2 specific types of intention in an offence.

  • intention to commit the act
  • an intention to get a specific result
17
Q

“inherently violent”

A

A sufficient implied threat

may be

inferred from circumstances

where the victim

is in a vulnerable position.

18
Q

Explain “extort”

A

To obtain by coercion or intimidation.

19
Q

Define “prevent”

A

To keep from happening.

20
Q

Define “overcome”

A

To defeat, to prevail over, to get the better of in a conflict.

21
Q

Define “instrument”

A

Any item intended to be used as a weapon

or

Any item intended to intimidate and overbear the victims will to resist.

22
Q

Explain “anything appearing to be a weapon”

A

It must be proved:

the object appeared to be an offensive weapon
or instrument to the victim,

and

The defendant intended it to be perceived as a weapon
or

it was reckless as to the possibility it would be perceived as a weapon.

**However a thing does not include a part of a person’s body.

23
Q

Explain “being together with any other person or persons”

A

There must be proof that, in committing the robbery,

joint enterprise

physically present at the robbery.

The forces of 2 or more persons acting together

deployed against the victim

in the actual commission of the offence.

intent to steal using their collective force

and must play a some active role in the robbery.

Mere presence without participation is not sufficient.

24
Q

Aggravated Robbery
Section 235, Crimes Act 1961
14 years imprisonment max

A
  1. Robs
  2. Any person

3.
(a) 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 person or persons, robs any person, or
(c) Being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument, or any thing appearing to be such a weapon or instrument, robs any other person.