VIOLENCE - ROBBERY Flashcards
Name key case laws for robbery
R v Lapier (robbery is complete upon taking)
R v Skivington (theft is an element of robbery)
R v Cox (2 elements to possession)
R v Maihi (act of stealing and threats must be commented)
R v McArthur (bodily harm)
Peneha v Police (actions of defendant must interfere with victims safety or cause injury)
R v Broughton (threat of violence is the manifestation of intent to inflict violence)
DPP v Smith (GBH def)
R v Galey (being together means 2 or more people sharing common intention)
R v Joyce (being together means being physically present at the of offence)
What are the 8 robbery liabilities to remember
Robbery
234(1)
Aggravated Robbery
235(a) - and causing GBH
235(b) - being together with
235(c) - carrying offensive weapon
Assault with Intent to Rob 236(1)(a) - and causing GBH 236(1)(b) - being armed with 236(1)(c) - being together with 236(2) -
Robbery is theft accompanied by violence. For the violence component, what 3 things must prosecution prove?
- connection between the violence and the stealing of the property
- the defendant held an intent to steal the property at the time the violence or threats were used
- the violence or threats were used for the purpose of extorting the property to be stolen, or preventing or overcoming resistance to it’s being stolen
Define stupefies
To stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person. This interferes with their mental or physical ability to act
R v Sturm
Define the two fold test that must be proven for recklessness
It must be proved not only that the defendant was aware of the risk and proceeded regardless (a subjective test), but also that it was unreasonable for him to do so (an objective test).
R v Joyce
Being together require two or more people acting (physically present together) in the commission of an offence
(being together with)
R v Galey
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.
R v Bentham
The weapon possessed must under definition be a thing. A person’s hands or fingers are not a thing.
(anything appearing to be such)
Define intent
Intent has two parts; an intention to commit the act and secondly, an intention to get a specific result.
R v Maihi
It is implicit in ‘accompany’ that there must be a nexus 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
(Accompanied by threats of violence)
Peneha v Police
It is sufficient that the actions of the defendant forcibly interfere with personal freedom or amount to forcible powerful or violent action or motion producing a very marked or powerful effect tending to cause bodily injury or discomfort.
(Violence)
R v Broughton
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. May be conveyed by words or conduct.
(Threats of violence)
R v Peat
As in the case of theft, the immediate return of goods by the robber does not purge the offence.
(taking)
R v Wells
No requirement the harm be inflicted on the victim of the robbery.
(To any person)
R v Skivington
Larceny or theft is an ingredient 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
(claim of right)
R v Lapier
Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary
(taking)
R v Cox
possession
Possession involves two elements. The first, the physical element, is actual or potential physical custody or control. The second, 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.
Actual possession arises where a thing in question is in a persons physical custody or control. It may be actual or potential control.
(possession)
R v Crossan
‘Incapable of resistance’ includes a powerlessness of the will as well as a physical incapacity
(incapable of resistance)
R v Sturm
To stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person which really seriously interferes with that person’s mental or physical ability to act in any way which might hinder an intended crime
(stupefy)
R v Tihi
In addition to one of the specific intents outlined in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), it must be shown the offender either meant to cause the specified harm or foresaw that the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to risk of suffering it
(two i’s - two intents)
R v Wati
There must be proof of the commission or attempted commission of a crime either by the person committing the assault or by the person whose arrest or flight he intends to avoid or facilitate
R v Tipple
Recklessness requires that the offender know of or have an appreciation of the risk. “A deliberate decision to run the risk”
(recklessness)
R v Cameron
Recklessness is established if:
A) The Defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that their actions would bring the proscribed result and the circumstances existed.
B) having regard to that risk, their actions were unreasonable.
(recklessness test)
R v McArthur
Bodily harm includes any hurt or injury that interferes with the health or comfort of the victim. More than merely transitory and trifling
(bodily harm)
