Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Mel Week 10 Study Cards > Robbery & Allied Concepts > Flashcards

Robbery & Allied Concepts Flashcards

1
Q

For a Section 94 “Robbery”, what do you need?

A
  • All the normal proofs of larceny
  • Violence (doesn’t have to be actual; a threat will suffice)
  • This can be to another person, other than the Victim (threat to hurt family member)
    *The violence or threat MUST coincide (nexus) with theft, or attempt (R v Emery)
    Fear does NOT have to be present; eg: when victim is pushed from behind.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is “In company”? Cite caselaw.

A

FP v R found that “in company” requires:

  • the offence was committed, and
  • that the co-accused persons shared a common purpose, and
  • the persons were physically present, such presence being sufficiently proximate if:
  • it afforded encouragement to the co-accused persons, or
  • it operated to intimidate or coerce the victim
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Is there a definition in the Crimes Act?

A

There is NO definition for robbery in the Crimes Act

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

Define what “robbery” as per Smith v Desmond.

A

Smith v Desmond, 1965 defines “Robbery” as:

“Robbery is an aggravated form of theft and is a combination offence consisting of stealing and an assault”.

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

Define what “robbery” as per R v Hickman.

A

“Robbery is the stealing or taking from, or in the presence of the person, of any property with such a degree of force or terror so as to induce the party to unwillingly part with their property”… The principal ingredient in robbery is man being forced to part with his property.

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

Cite the 2 x cases that define “robbery”

A

Smith v Desmond (1965)
and
R v Hickman (1784)

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

R v Hickman defines robbery and then goes on to describe terror. Explain

A

Fear is not a necessity to prove (ie: if they don’t know/come up from behind, the victim may not always be in fear).

… “whether terror arises from real or expected violence to the person, or from a sense of injury to the character the law makes no distinction”.
-R v Hickman

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

Where are the Robbery sections found in the Crimes Act?

A

Sections 94 to 99 of the Crimes Act.

Robbery - regardless of dollar value is a Table 1 offence.
Steal from person (94(b))
less than $5K = Table 2
greater than $5K = Table 1.

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

What are the Robbery sections in the Crimes Act?

A 
S94 - Robbery / Steal from person
S95 - Aggravated Robbery
S96 - Aggravated Robbery with wounding
S97(1) - Robbery - armed or in company 
S98 - Robbery whilst armed or in company with wounding or GBH
Allied offences: 
S99 - Demand property with menaces.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is the jurisdiction for a Robbery charge?

A 
Simpliciter - local court
Most Aggravated are strictly indictable
T1 and T2
* steal from person (s94(b))
* Robbery and assault with intent to rob (s94(a)))
* Demand with menaces (s99)
All SI robberies are DPP 
DPP CAN elect on s94 offences
Jurisdiction in Children’s Court except if penalty 25 years or life.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What offence is found at Section 94 of the Crimes Act?

A 
94(a) = Robbery
94(b) = Steal from person

In relation to 94(b) $5K = Table 1 offence.
Robbery, regardless of dollar value is a Table 1 offence.

94 Robbery or stealing from the person
Whosoever—
(a) robs or assaults with intent to rob any person, or
(b) steals any chattel, money, or valuable security from the person of another,
shall, except where a greater punishment is provided by this Act, be liable to imprisonment for fourteen years.

There are 3 offences under this Section:
Robs
Assault with intent to rob
Steal from person

*In relation to the assault with intent to rob - must be a threat that coincides with the taking of the property and must be sufficiently proximate in time to the taking of the property.

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

What offence is found at Section 95 of the Crimes Act?

A

Aggravated Robbery. 95(2) states that Aggravation includes:

aggravation means circumstances that (immediately before, or at the time of, or immediately after the robbery, assault or larceny) involve any one or more of the following—

(a) the alleged offender uses corporal violence on any person,
(b) the alleged offender intentionally or recklessly inflicts actual bodily harm on any person,
(c) the alleged offender deprives any person of his or her liberty.

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

What offence is found at Section 96 of the Crimes Act?

A

Aggravated Robbery with wounding or GBH

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

What offence is found at Section 97(1) of the Crimes Act?

A

Robbery - armed or in company

Robbery etc or stopping a mail, being armed or in company

(1) Whosoever, being armed with an offensive weapon, or instrument, or being in company with another person, robs, or assaults with intent to rob, any person, or
stops any mail, or vehicle, railway train, or person conveying a mail, with intent to rob, or search the same,
shall be liable to imprisonment for twenty years.

(2) Aggravated offence - A person is guilty of an offence under this subsection if the person commits an offence under subsection (1) when armed with a dangerous weapon. A person convicted of an offence under this subsection is liable to imprisonment for 25 years.
(3) Alternative verdict If on the trial of a person for an offence under subsection (2) the jury is not satisfied that the accused is guilty of the offence charged, but is satisfied on the evidence that the accused is guilty of an offence under subsection (1), it may find the accused not guilty of the offence charged but guilty of the latter offence, and the accused is liable to punishment accordingly.

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

What offence is found at Section 97(2) of the Crimes Act?

A

Aggravated Robbery - armed or in company

(2) Aggravated offence - A person is guilty of an offence under this subsection if the person commits an offence under subsection (1) when armed with a dangerous weapon. A person convicted of an offence under this subsection is liable to imprisonment for 25 years.

Most aggravated robberies are strictly indictable.

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

What offence is found at Section 98 of the Crimes Act?

A

Robbery whilst armed or in company - with wounding or GBH

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

What allied offence is found at Section 99 of the Crimes Act?

A

Demand property with menaces

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

Is robbery found on Table 1 or Table 2 to the Schedule?

A

Robbery, regardless of dollar value is a Table 1 offence.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Where is the definition of “Property” found, in relation to the property robbed?

A

Definition of Property for Robbery is found under Section 4 of the Crimes Act.
HOWEVER:
Property taken in a “steal from person” offence is NOT defined under section 4 - it is defined as personal property that is moveable.

18
Q

What case defines “Immediate Control”?

A

R v Delk [1999] NSWCCA 134

Immediate Control is defined as: “taken from the person or in their presence, or from under their immediate & personal care”;

19
Q

What are the proofs of Robbery?

A

The unlawful taking and carrying away of some property, being of some value;

Taken from their person or in their presence, or from under their immediate and personal care;

With the intention of permanently depriving the person of their property;
Against their will;
Either by force or instilling fear.

20
Q

Section 94 additional offences: Assault with intent to rob and Steal from person.

A

Assault with intent to rob (T1) - must use violence with an intention to take away (steal) property, but the crime does not amount to a completed robbery.

Steal from Person(T1 and T2) - no physical violence or contact upon the victim, but property taken from immediate control or presence of the victim.

21
Q

What is the definition of “Chattel”?

A

Different to property. Chattel must be something which is capable of being taken at common law.

22
Q

What is a defence in relation to Robbery?

A

Claim of Right (Caselaw = R v Fuge).

Needs to be an “honestly held belief”
Needs to be a legal right, not a moral right.
Claim of Right does not have to be reasonable
Claim of Right should not be based on mere ignorance of criminal law
Claim of Right relates to property
The onus (once raised) is for them to prove on the balance of probabilities and for us to negative beyond a reasonable doubt.

23
Q

What did the case of R v Kastratovic (1985) find in relation to Robbery and Claim of Right?

A

“… an honest claim of right is a complete defence and, if accepted as a reasonable possibility by the jury, entitles the accused to an acquittal”.

24
Q

What did the HCA case of Walden v Hensler (1987) find in relation to Robbery and Claim of Right?

A

“Where the prosecution must prove intent, an inconsistent belief, honestly held will afford a defence”.

25
Q

In relation to the offence of Aggravated Robbery found at Section 95, What is found at Section 95(2)?

A

Section 95(1) is the actual offence of Aggravated Robbery and Section 95(2) is the circumstances of Aggravation.

26
Q

R v Harrison (1930) found what in relation to corporal violence and robbery?

A

R v Harrison found that “Any degree of corporal violence is sufficient”.

27
Q

In relation to the circumstances of Aggravation in robbery, how many aggravating circumstances are relied upon?

A

One or more than one aggravating circumstance can be relied upon.

28
Q

Section 95(2) (Circumstances of Aggravation) states: “means at, or immediately before or immediately after the robbery”… what does immediately mean?

A

Immediately does not mean the exact time of robbery, but so close as to become one act.

29
Q

Section 96 (Aggravated Robbery with Wounding) requires?

A

All the requirements of Section 95 (Aggravated Robbery) AND

Wounding or inflicting GBH on any person.

30
Q 
Section 96 (Aggravated Robbery with wounding) requires 
Wounding or inflicting GBH on ANY person. Cite caselaw in relation to ANY person
A

Ryan v the Queen (1967).

31
Q

In relation to Section 96 (Aggravated Robbery with Wounding) does there need to be an intent to wound or cause GBH? Cite caselaw.

A

No. It is not necessary to prove an intent to wound or cause GBH R v Munro (1981). All that is required is the requisite mens rea to establish Section 95.

32
Q

What is wounding defined as?

A

“Wounding” means breaking the skin; it must bleed, burns may not suffice. It requires the penetration of both the dermis and epidermis.

33
Q

Where is Grievous Bodily Harm defined?

A

GBH is defined at Section 4 of the Crimes Act “means no more and no less than “really serious”.

(Really serious is a matter of fact for the jury).

34
Q

Section 97(1) - Robbery whilst armed or in company - where is the definition for “in company” found?

A

In the common law. Caselaw: FP v R.

FP v R found that “in company” requires:

  • the offence was committed, and
  • that the co-accused persons shared a common purpose, and
  • the persons were physically present, such presence being sufficiently proximate if:
  • it afforded encouragement to the co-accused persons, or
  • it operated to intimidate or coerce the victim
35
Q

Section 97(1) - Robbery whilst armed or in company - where is the definition for “offensive weapon or instrument” found?

A

In the Definitions Section of the Crimes Act.

36
Q

What is the only Section in the Robbery Part that has an alternative verdict and what is it?

A 
Section 97 (Robbery whilst Armed or In Company)
The Alternative verdict is found at 97(3) and states:

If on the trial of a person for an offence under subsection (2) the jury is not satisfied that the accused is guilty of the offence charged, but is satisfied on the evidence that the accused is guilty of an offence under subsection (1), it may find the accused not guilty of the offence charged but guilty of the latter offence, and the accused is liable to punishment accordingly.

37
Q

What does “armed” mean in relation to Section 97?

A

“Armed” means “in possession of” and includes bearing or having immediate physical possession of the weapon or instrument.

38
Q

What does “armed with” mean in relation to Section 97? Cite Caselaw

A

Miller v Hrvojevic (1972) found that “armed with” connotes “in the possession of” but it must be actual and not constructive possession.

Actual possession is having immediate physical control of and constructive possession (for example) is locked in a locker/boot and not readily able to be used quickly.

39
Q

97(2) Aggravated Armed Robbery is the aggravated offence committed if the offender is armed with a DANGEROUS weapon not just an offensive weapon or instrument? Where is the Definition for Dangerous Weapon found?

A

Yes. Dangerous weapon definition is found at Section 4 of the Crimes Act and means: a firearm, or a prohibited weapon, or a spear gun.

40
Q

Section 98 is Robbery whilst armed or in company with wounding. Section 96 (Aggravated Robbery with wounding) says that “any person” can be wounded (Ryan v The Queen). Is this the case for Section 98?

A

No. In Section 98, the words state that the wounding or inflicting GBH must be to “that” person (victim) whereas Section 96 can be any person (either the Victim or an innocent bystander).

41
Q

Section 99 is Demanding Property with intent to steal. Commonly called “Demand property with menace” or “Extortion”. What are the elements?

A

The accused:

  • demanded property from the victim; and
  • the demand was accompanied by menaces or by force; and
  • the accused intended to steal that property.

This is a Table 1 offence and must be with a demand and a menace. There needs also to be an intent to gain.

42
Q

In relation to Section 99 (Demand Property with intent to steal) what does “Demand” include?

A

Demand:

  • can be by words OR gestures
  • request imposing conditions may be evidence of a demand
  • the sending of a letter is enough
43
Q

In relation to Section 99 (Demand Property with intent to steal) what does “Menaces” include?

A

Menaces can involve:
Violence (to the person or property)
Injury
Accusation

44
Q

In relation to Section 99 (Demand Property with intent to steal) what is the test for Menaces? Cite Caselaw x 2.

A

R v Garwood (1987) and R v Clear (1968)

The current test for menacing is R v Garwood (1987) where it was established that menacing “must be calculated to deprive any person of reasonable sound mind of the free and voluntary action of his/her mind”.

R v Clear (1968) found menacing to be: “of such a nature and extent that the mind of an ordinary person of normal stability and courage might be influenced or made apprehensive so as to accede unwillingly to the demand”.

45
Q

What is the difference between Robbery and Demanding Property?

A
  • A demand is accompanied by a threat or menace, in robbery what is required is force or fear.
  • Demand can be a threat to the property of the Victim but not so in robbery.
  • DP can receive the property at some later time. No requirement that the property/possession passes at time (coincide) or at alli

Mel Week 10 Study Cards (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions