2- Robbery Flashcards

1
Q

What is the definition of robbery?

A

s8 Theft Act 1968 states:
“A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force.”

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

Under which act is robbery an offence?

A

s8 of the Theft Act 1968

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

Which elements must be proved for the AR and MR of robbery?

A

AR:

  • Theft
  • Force or putting or seeking to put any person in fear of force.
    • The force must be:
      1. Immediately before or at the time of the theft
      2. In order to steal

MR:

  • Mens rea for theft
  • Intention to use force to steal
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

AR: Explain completed theft and include a KEY CASE

A

1st element that needs to be proven of the AR is that there must be a completed theft.

This means all elements of theft must be present

If there is no offence of theft, using force cannot make it into a robbery- R v Zerei (2012)

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

AR: What happens when force is used to steal before the theft is completed? Include KEY CASE

A

The moment the theft is completed there is a robbery, as seen in Corcoran v Anderton (1980)

However, if it isn’t completed, there is an attempted theft and D could be charged with attempted robbery.

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

AR: What is the 2nd thing the prosecution must prove after a completed theft for there to be a robbery?

A

Force or threat of force.

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

AR: What are the KEY CASES on ‘force or threat of force’ and what points on robbery do they illustrate?

A
  1. R v Dawson and James (1976)- the amount of force can be small, it is for the jury to decide whether there is a use of ‘force’.
  2. P v DPP (2012)- Where there is no direct contact between D and the victim, it cannot be said that force has been used ‘on a person’, and D is not guilty of robbery.
  3. Robbery can also be committed if D puts or seeks to put a person in fear of force. This covers threatening words and gestures, such as holding a knife in front of the victim.
  4. B and R v DPP (2007)- The victim doesn’t need to be frighten for a robbery to be committed, it is only necessary that D seeks to put the victim in fear of being then and there subjected to force.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

AR: What does ‘on any person’ in the definition of robbery mean?

A

The person threatened doesn’t need to be the person to whom the theft occurs.
- Ex: Armed robber at a bank threatens to shoot a customer unless a bank official gets money out of the safe. The fact that the person being put in fear of use of force is not the owner of the property stolen doesn’t matter.

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

AR: What is the 3rd thing to be taken into account for the AR of robbery?

A

Force must be immediately before or at the time of the theft.

This raises 2 problems:

  1. .How immediate does ‘immediately before’ have to be? What if someone was robbed hours or even a day before the theft takes place, as for example someone robbing a person in order to obtain security codes for a bank, and stealing from the bank hours later?
  2. At what point is the theft completed, so that the force used is not ‘at the time of stealing’?
    • This was considered in R v Hale (1979) and R v Lockley (1995), where courts viewed appropriation as a continuing act.
    • In Lockley, where appropriation had been completed by the time of the use of force, the decision to uphold his conviction conflicts with the approach in theft cases, as in Atakpu v Abrahams (1994).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

AR: What is the last thing to be taken into account for the AR of robbery?

A

Force must be in order to steal.
- Ex: D has an argument with the victim and punches them, knocking them out. D then sees some money in the victim’s pocket and takes it. The force was not used in order to steal, so there is no robbery, just 2 different offences: assault and theft.

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

Explain the MR of robbery

A
  1. D must have the MR for theft:
    • They must be dishonest
    • They must intend to permanently deprive the other of the property.
  2. In addition, D must also intend to use force to steal.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

KEY CASES for robbery

A
  1. R v Zerei (2012)
  2. Corcoran v Anderton (1980)
  3. R v Dawson and James (1976)
  4. P v DPP (2012)
  5. B and R v DPP (2007)
  6. R v Hale (1979)
  7. R v Lockley (1995)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly