WS 7 - Robbery and Burglary

Question 1

STEP 2: State OFFENCE that D may have committed on the facts:

Answer 1

1) s.8(1) Theft Act 1968 – Robbery (indictable only: maximum sentence life imprisonment). OR;
2) s.9(1)(a) Theft Act 1968 – Burglary; and;
3) s.9(1)(b) Theft Act 1968 – Burglary

Question 2

Actus Reus of Robbery

Answer 2

1) D stole
2) D either used force on any person, or put or sought to put any person in fear of being then and there (immediately) subjected to force
3) THE FORCE OR THREAT OF FORCE WAS IMMEDIATELY BEFORE, OR AT TIME OF THE THEFT
4) FORCE/THREAT OF FORCE WAS USED IN ORDER TO STEAL

Question 3

Mens Rea of Robbery

Answer 3

1) D STOLE (I.E. THE MENS REA OF THEFT)

2) RECKLESSNESS OR INTENTION AS TO THE USE/THREAT OF FORCE

Question 4

How great must the force be?

Answer 4

i. Is a matter for the jury in each case to determine; but need NOT be significant (R v Dawson (1976)

Question 5

R v Dawson facts

Answer 5

2 Ds had jostled V, making it difficult for him to keep his balance, and at the same time another man had taken the V’s wallet. The Ds appealed against their conviction for robbery on the basis that the jostling could not, in law, amount to the use of force. Court of Appeal said whether it was force was matter for the jury. Trial judges says force must be substantial. CoA did not pass comment, but jury seem to suggest it does not need to be.)

Question 6

R v Clouden

Answer 6

Force may be that applied to someone’s property

Question 7

What is the requirement for robbery when the force is threatened against third party?

Answer 7

May be in relation to ANY PERSON (s.8(1) TA 1968). But, where force threatened against a 3rd party, 3rd party must be aware of this threat

Question 8

What must be checked for on the facts with regards to timing of force?

Answer 8

must check that the force does not occur a long time before theft & whether the theft is complete

Question 9

R v Hale

Answer 9

Jury to consider: Was the appropriation still continuing at the time the force was used? If yes, D may be guilty. Eveleigh LJ made it clear that the question of whether the appropriation was still continuing was a question to be determined by the jury

Question 10

When is the D’s appropriation not dishonest?

Answer 10

Remember – D’s appropriation is not dishonest if falls within s.2(1) TA 1968 (e.g. D believes he would have had owners consent if owner knew)

Question 11

What does prof smith say about intention/recklessness as to the use or threat of force?

Answer 11

Prof J.C. Smith in ‘The Law of Theft’ argues that recklessness is enough

Question 12

Actus Reus for s.9(1)(a)

Answer 12

Enter
A building
As a trespasser

Question 13

Mens Rea for s.9(1)(a)

Answer 13

Knows or reckless as to entering as a trespasser

Intention to commit theft, GBH or Criminal damage

Question 14

Actus Reus for s.9(1)(b)

Answer 14

Enter

A building

As a Trespasser

Commit the AR of GBH/Attempted GBH or Theft/Attempted theft

Question 15

Mens Rea for s.9(1)(b)

Answer 15

Knows or is reckless as to entering as a trespasser

Mens Rea of GBH or Theft

Question 16

R v Brown [1985]

Answer 16

Court of Appeal: Entry must be EFFECTIVE for the purpose of burglary (question of fact for jury) Facts: upheld the conviction of D who leant in through a shop window for the purpose of stealing items from within the shop.

Question 17

R v Ryan [1996]:

Answer 17

Facts: D convicted of burglary after being discovered by an elderly householder, firmly stuck with his head and arm inside a window. Entry of SOME PART of D’s body into premises could be effective entry (whether D is able to commit the crime is irrelevant)

NB - COULD be effective entry

Question 18

Could an instrument inserted to commit the offence amount to burglary?

Answer 18

Where an INSTRUMENT is inserted to commit the offence, this amounts to entry (but not where it is used to gain access to building) [Prof Griew says would be the same under new law, in The Theft Act s 1968 and 1978]

Question 19

a. s.9(4) TA 1968

Answer 19

‘building’ includes inhabited vehicles and vessels

Question 20

To be a building the structure must have a…

Answer 20

degree of permanence

Question 21

R v Walkington

Answer 21

. Cof A rejected argument, arguing that the till area was a separate part of the building which the D had entered as a trespasser. Geoffrey-Lane: Physical demarcation (e.g. roped off area; counter) which excludes the public from a certain area may indicate that this is a SEPARATE PART OF THE BUILDING (question of fact for the jury)

• Crucial to note that the defendant must enter a building or part of a building as a trespasser with the intention of either stealing or inflicting GBH in that building

Question 22

Proof of what for AR trespassing?

Answer 22

a. Need proof that D ENTERED WITHOUT CONSENT/PERMISSION

Question 23

R v Boyle [1954]:

Answer 23

Permission to enter gained through fraud is not true possession (NB – no direct authority for this under the new law)

Question 24

R v Jones and Smith:

Answer 24

If the D enters a building with the intention of doing something contrary to a general permission to enter, this can be trespass

i. But – only if D knew or was reckless that he was exceeding the terms of permission given, and intended to do so at the time of entry

Question 25

Requirements extra element of Actus Reus in s.9(1)(b)

Answer 25

5) D COMMITS THE ACTUS REUS OF THEFT/ATTEMPTED THEFT OR GBH/ATTEMPTED GBH
a. see WS 6 (for theft) and WS 2 (for GBH)
b. Must occur in the same part of the building that D has entered as a trespasser
c. [NB – Wounding/breaking of skin will not suffice for GBH as it does for the OAPA 1861]

Question 26

MR of Trespass

Answer 26

a. D must possess this MR at the time of entry: (R v Collins [1973]

D must either know he was entering as a trespasser, or be reckless as to whether he was a trespasser or not

Question 27

Define recklessness

Answer 27

foresee a risk that he does not have permission to enter and go on, without justification, to take that risk

Question 28

For s.9(1)(a) when must the intent to commit the offence be existent?

Answer 28

Must coincide with time of entry

Question 29

Is conditional intent sufficient for s.9(1)(a)?

Answer 29

b. A-G’s Reference No s.1 and 2 of 1979 [1980]: Can be CONDITIONAL intent where the Ds had entered a building looking for money to steal (e.g.. conditional on there being something worth stealing)
• No defence to argue that intent to steal was conditional on there being anything worth stealing

Question 30

What about intent to commit the crime and part of the building?

Answer 30

c. If D trespasses in part of building, this intent must be in relation to the same part

Question 31

When is the MR of trespass needed for a charge of s.9(1)(b)?

Answer 31

a. Debate about when the MR of Trespass is needed for s.9(1)(b). Would seem from R v Collins that it is at the time of entry. However, that case was about s.9(1)(a). It is argued that for s.9(1)(b) D need only possess this MR at the time he commits ulterior offence (i.e. form MR after entry)

Question 32

What are the two SPECIAL points to note?

Answer 32

NB – NOTE THE DIFFERENCE IN MR REQUIREMENTS FOR s.9(1)(a) and s.9(1)(b) – for (a) you need the intent to commit the relevant offence. For (b) you need the MENS REA for the relevant offence

AND

NB – Wounding/breaking of skin will not suffice for GBH as it does for the OAPA 1861