Associations Flashcards
(93 cards)
Section and elements for Conspiracy
S310 Crimes Act 1961
-Conspires
-With any person
-To commit any offence OR to do OR omit
-In any part of the world
-Anything of which the doing or omission in NZ would be an offence
***Do not use for murder, treason, piracy, false accusations, defeating justice
Mulcahy v R
Application - Conspires
A conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more, but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means.
Notes on withdrawing from an agreement (conspiracy)
A person withdrawing from the agreement is still guilty of conspiracy unless withdrawn before the actual agreement is made.
R v Sanders
Application - Conspires (when conspiracy ends)
A conspiracy does not end with the making of the agreement. The conspiratorial agreement continues in operation and therefore in existence until it is ended by the completion of its performance or abandonment or in any other manner by which agreements are discharged.
R v White
Application - With any person/ two or more people
Where you can prove that a suspect conspired with other parties whose identities are unknown, that suspect can still be convicted even if the identity of the other parties is never established and remains unknown.
Define omit/omission
A failure to fulfil a moral or legal obligation
Notes on jurisdiction (Conspiracy)
Where any act or omission forming part of any offence or any event necessary to the completion of any offence, occurs in NZ, the offence shall be deemed to be committed in NZ.
Conspiracy case laws
Mulcahy v R
R v Sanders
R v White
Attempts case laws
R v Ring
R v Harpur
Higgins v Police
Police v Jay
R v Donnelly
Three elements of the attempt offence + Section
S72 CA61
-Intent to commit an offence
-Act - that they did or omitted to do, something to achieve that end
-Proximity - that their act or omission was sufficiently close
**must be legally possible to commit offence
R v Ring
Application - Intent (attempt) + When act is physically impossible
In the case the offender’s intent was to steal property by putting his hand into the pocket of the victim. Unbeknownst to the offender the pocket was empty. Despite this he was able to be convicted of attempted theft, because the intent to steal whatever property might have been discovered inside the pocket was present in his mind and demonstrated by his actions.
R v Harpur
Application - proximity (attempt)
The court may have regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point when the conduct in question stops .. the defendant’s conduct may be considered in its entirety. considering how much remains to be done is always relevant, though not determinative.
Proximity test for attempts offences
-Has the offender done anything more than getting himself into a position from which he could embark on an actual attempt? OR
-Has the offender actually commenced execution; that is to say, has he taken a step in the actual crime itself
Who decides proximity?
S72(2) CA61 highlights that proximity is a question of law; it is a question that is decided by the judge.
Higgins v Police
Application - When an act is physically impossible
Where plants being cultivated as cannabis are not in fact cannabis it is physically, not legally, impossible to cultivate such prohibited plants. Accordingly, it is possible to commit the offence of attempting to cultivate cannabis.
Police v Jay
Application - When an act is physically impossible
A man bought hedge clippings believing they were cannabis
R v Donnelly
Application - When an act is legally impossible (attempt and receiving)
Where stolen property has been returned to the owner or legal title to any such property has been acquired by any person, it is not an offence to subsequently receive it, even though the receiver may know that the property had previously been stolen or dishonestly obtained.
Functions of a judge and jury in an attempt case
-The judge must decide whether the defendant had left the preparation stage
-The jury must then decide whether the facts presented by the Crown have been proved beyond reasonable doubt and if so must decide whether the defendant’s acts are close enough to the full offence.
Attempts punishment
Life -> 10 years
Non life -> half of original
Section/elements for Parties to Offence
S66(1) CA1961
(a)Actually commits the offence OR
(b)Does or omits an act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence or
(c)Abets any person in the commission of the offence or
(d)incites, counsels, or procures any person to commit the offence.
Notes on Section 70 CA61 (parties related)
Everyone who INCITES, COUNSELS, or PROCURES another party to be a party to an offence of which that other is afterwards guilty is a party to that offence although it may be committed in a way different from that which was incited, counselled or suggested.
What is required to be proved for a Party to the offence
-Identity of the defendant
-An offence that has been successfully committed
-the elements of the offence(S66(1)) has been satisfied
**Participation must have occurred before or during the commission of the offence.
R v Pene
Application - Intention to help or encourage (parties)
A party must intentionally help or encourage - it is insufficient if they were reckless as to whether the principal was assisted or encouraged.
What is a secondary party in relation to S66
People whose assistance, abetment, incitement, counselling or procurement is sufficient under S66(1)(b),(c) or (d) of CA61. The secondary party does not necessarily have to present when the offence is committed.