Robbery Flashcards
Robbery
Theft with the use or threat of force.
Robbery is an offence under what Act and section?
s8 Theft Act 1968
s8 Theft Act 1968
Definition of robbery
What are the elements for the actus reus of robbery?
1) Theft
2) Force or applying fear of force
What are the two elements to the mens rea of robbery?
1) had mens rea for Theft
2) intended to use force to steal
What cases demonstrates that theft must be complete for a conviction of robbery?
1) R v Zerei (2012)-D stole car at knifepoint and abandoned it.
2) R v Waters (2015)-D stole phone with condition that V friend would speak to him.
R v Zerei (2012)
Principle: That if Theft is not complete then there cannot be a conviction of robbery.
Facts: D stole car at knifepoint. Abandoned car later on nearby. D not guilty of theft as no intention to permanently deprive.
R v Waters (2015)
Principle: If Theft is not complete then there cannot be a conviction of robbery.
Facts: D took girls phone and gave condition that V friend talk to him to return the phone. D not guilty of theft or robbery as condition could have been met imminently.
What case demonstrates that robbery occurs as soon as force is used and theft is complete?
Corcoran v Anderson (1980)
Facts: D took woman handbag with force but unintentionally and immediately dropped it. D guilty of robbery.
Corcoran v Anderton (1980)
Principle: that robbery occurs as soon as force and theft is complete.
Facts: D took woman handbag but unintentionally and immediately dropped it. D charged with robbery.
What case demonstrates that the amount of force can be small and must be decided by the jury.
R v Dawson and James (1976)
Facts: D pushed V giving other D chance to take his wallet. Both D’s convicted of robbery.
R v Dawson and James (1976)
Principle: that any amount of force is sufficient and is decided by the jury.
Facts: D pushed V giving other D chance to take his wallet. D’s charged with robbery.
What case supports the principle that if D snatches property from V without touching V they may not have committed robbery?
P v DPP (2012)
Facts: D snatched a cig from V mouth without touching V. D NOT guilty of robbery.
P v DPP (2012)
Principle: If D snatches property without touching V, then this is not necessarily robbery.
Facts: D snatched a cig from V mouth without touching V. D NOT guilty of robbery.
What case demonstrates that D can be guilty of robbery having applied force AFTER the theft?
R v Lockley (1995)
Facts: D stole cans of beer but only used force to escape. D guilty of robbery.
