Property Offences And Attempts Flashcards
(18 cards)
Describe preliminary offences with its MR & AR
Most important case: R v white 1910
S.1 criminal attempts act 1981
Mens rea: intent to commit offence
Actus reus: person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence
Not succeeding makes no difference to sentencing
can only be prosecuted of attempts of indictable or triable offences whether something amounts to an offence is up to the jury. omissions do not constitute to attempts
Give 4 cases for preliminary offences
R v Gullefer 1987
D was at greyhound racetrack. He ran on the track in an attempt to get it null & void to get his money back. - guilty of attempted theft.
he appealed on basis that it was not more than merely preparatory. - appeal accepted: not guilty.
Legal principle: Jumping on track was preparatory-Judge said D not need to reach a point which is impossible to retreat from. If he demanded money back-attempt
R v Totsi 1997
D had oxyacetylene equipment that he hid near barn he wanted to break into. He walked up to barn & examined lock, realised he was being watched and ran Legal principle: convicted for attempted burglary - checking it was more than merely preparatory
R v Geddes 1996
D was found in toilets at school - was shouted at and left. in the bag left behind contained rope, knife & masking tape
Legal principle: not guilty - clear preparation but no steps to embark on false imprisoning someone
Mason v DPP 2009
D called police to report stolen car. Police breathalysed him and found he was over limit & convicted for attempting to drunk drive
Define theft
S.1 theft act 1960
A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it
Define appropriation
Appropriation:
S3.1 Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner - taking it, destroying it, using it in an unauthorised way, selling it etc
S3.2 where property or a right or interest in property is or purports to be transferred for value to a person acting in good faith
Give 3 cases for appropriation
R v Morris
Defendant took goods from supermarket and substituted lower price labels for ones currently on the goods - at checkout he paid discounted price and was arrested
Lord roskill stated it is enough for prosecution if they have proved… the assumption of any rights of the owner of goods in question
R v Gomez
Defendant was the assistant manager of a shop - he persuaded manager to sell electrical goods worth over 17K to an accomplice and to accept payment by two cheques telling the manager they were as good as cash - the cheques were stolen and had no value
Lawrence v MPC
Italian student took taxi ride for which proper care was 52 p but he accepted the fl that V offered and then proceeded to take a further £6 as he claimed he needed more
What is property
Money, real property, things in action, other intangible property.
Can not be stolen: mushrooms, flowers fruit or foliage - not done for commercial purpose, a wild animal
Give 4 cases for property
R v Welsh
Defendant was convicted when he removed urine sample he provided for analysis.
• Oxfora v Moss
Student at university acquired proof of an exam paper intending to read its contents and return it - she had no intention of stealing the actual paper
Information can not be stolen
R v Akbar
School teacher took GCSE papers from school and gave them to her class and was jailed for 3 months
R v Kohn 1979
D was an accountant. Part of his job was to pay cheques to pay of companies debts, but he paid some of his own off.
He was guilty of stealing a thing in action’
What is belonging to another
S.5 of the theft act defined as property is regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or intent → it can therefore belong to more than one person at a time, and a person can be guilty of stealing properties belonging to himself
Give 3 cases for belonging to another
R v Wain
D organised Charity fundraiser event, from which the money was paid into his own account unable to account for £2800
Legal principle: he had the obligation to pay the money to the charity - belonged to another
• Davidge v Bunnett
D received cheques from flatmates to pay gas bill - the property (money) didn’t belong to her as she had an obligation to use it to pay gas bill
R v woodman
Company sold and bought scrap metal, they sold it all to another company - the company took the metal but forgot a small amount, D took the remaining
Define dishonesty
• matter for the jury to decide (R V Feely (1973))
Statute doesn’t define what dishonest is, but does indicate three situations where D will not be dishonest:
Section 2:
If he appropriates property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person: belief in the right to deprivel or If he appropriates the property in the belief that he would have the others consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances of it; or
If he appropriates property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs
cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps
Give a case for belief in the right to deprive
R v Holden 1991
The defendant was charged with the theft of scrap tyres from Kwik-Fit where he worked He claimed that other people had taken tyres with the permission of the supervisor. The manager however gave evidence that taking tyres was a sackable offence.
The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction; a person was not dishonest if he believed, reasonably, or not, that he had a legal right to do what he had done. The question was whether he had an honest belief that he was entitled to take the tyres.
Therefore it is not necessary for the accused to prove that his belief is a reasonable one, providing that it is genuinely held
Give a case for belief that owner could not be found
R v small 1998
The defendant was convicted of theft of a car. He claimed that he believed it had been abandoned, because it had been parked in the same place for two weeks with the keys in the ignition. The jury did not believe his story but the Court of Appeal quashed his conviction, as there was evidence that the car had been abandoned and he had an honest belief that the owner could not he traced
Give the tests for dishonesty
R V Ghosh
Where the exceptions dont apply, common law is needed to decide what is dishonest.
The long-standing test for dishonesty (known as the Ghosh test) was established in the case of R V Ghosh.
The test was:
Was the defendant dishonest by the standards of reasonable and honest people?
D realise that he or she had been dishonest by those standards?
Ivey V Genting Casinos- This case outlined that the second part of the Ghosh test should no longer be required. - CIVIL CASE
Booth & Another V R |20201
Confirmed the decision in Ivey, so that now only the first part of the Ghosh test is required. - This is now precedent as this is a criminal case. lhe test is now purely an objective one:
Was the defendant dishonest by the standards of reasonable and honest people?
Define intent to permanently deprive
Intention to permanently deprive
S6 (1): if he intends to treat the property as his own to dispose of regardless - this may occur even in cases where the offender is claiming that he has only borrowed the goods
S6 (2): as treating the property of another as his own in cases where he parts with the possession of it under a condition as to its return which he may not be able to perform.
Give 3 cases of intent to permanently deprive
(R v Raphael
R and others were convicted of a conspiracy to rob V by forcibly taking his car and then offering him the opportunity to buy it back from them.
The question arose whether this could amount to robbery, or whether since V would get his property back (albeit by having to pay for it) there was no intention permanently to deprive and hence no theft.
Sir Igor Judge P suggested that it was hard to find a better example of such an intention” than the facts of this case.
R v Marshall
The defendants obtained day tickets to travel on London Underground from travellers who had finished with them, and the defendants then sold the tickets to other travellers.
They were convicted but appealed on the ground that, as each ticket would be returned to when they had been used by the second traveller: there was no intention to permanently deprive LU of the tickets.
The LA upheld their convictions on the basis that the men were treating the tickets as their own to dispose of, regardless of LU’s rights. It was not relevant that the tickets would eventually be returned to Lu
R v Velumyl
The defendant had taken £1,050 from his employer’s safe and claimed that he intended to pay it back after the weekend and therefore had no intention permanently to deprive the employer of his property.
The Court of Appeal held that he had not intended to return the exact coins and notes and that therefore he was properly convicted of theft.
How many years is theft
Seven years imprisonment- Triable either way- 515 Criminal Justice Act 1991
Define robbery
58 Theft Act 1968
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 seeks to put them in fear of being then and there subjected to force- aggravated form of theft
MR- Mr of theft & intention to use force to steal
Give 4 cases for robbery
R v Robinson
D ran clothing club & was owed money by V’s wife - D threatened V with knife and £5 note fell from V’s pocket which D appropriated and further claimed he was still owed £?
Court of appeal quashed his conviction on grounds that he had honest belief that he was entitled to money
R v Corcoran & Anderton
Two ds tried to take womans handbag by force. - they grabbed hold of bag but woman screamed and two defendants ran off without it
CoA held that offence was complete when bag was snatched- an appropriation
R v zerei
& another man approached v who they know and told him they are going to take his car -d pulled a knife, punched V took car & left but parked it 1 km away and car was undamaged
CoA found that judge misdirected and ruled that there was no intention to permanently deprive here
R v Waters
I snatched Vs phone from her and told her that she could have it back if one of her friends who would speak to D- police were immediately called - D charged with robbery
CoA quashed the conviction as no intent to deprive
