Upgrade to remove ads
Only $35.99/year

special study robbery

Terms in this set (11)

s.8 Robbery: theft act 1968
(1) 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 the fear of being then and there subjected to force
(2) A person guilty of robbery or assault with intent to rob, shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for life.
R v Robinson
Ratio: All the elements of theft including dishonesty must be satisfied for robbery.
D was owed £7 by V, he went to get his money with a knife he threatened V's husband and managed to obtain £5. D wasn't guilty as the appropriation was not dishonest as D had an honest belief to a legal right to the money s.2 (1)(a)
R v Forrester
Ratio: All the elements of theft including dishonesty must be satisfied for robbery.
V had kept D's £200 deposit when D's tenancy ended. D believed he had been asked to leave without justification and that V had obey unfairly. so D broke into his house and stole some stuff as a way of bargaining for his money or to sell. conviction upheld as he believed he had right to the money not the items.
R v Dawson and James
1. 'Force' under s.8 of the theft act 1968 is to be left to the jury to interpret as it is an ordinary word in common use.
2. force in robbery need not be substantial.
Two D's robbed V. one nudged him to disrupt balance as the other stop wallet. GUILTY(nudge amounted to force)
R v Clouden
Ratio: Force need not be directly applied to V it can be indirect.
D pulled victims handbag to take it from her hands the pulling of the bag amounted to force. so could be robbery.
B and R v DPP
ratio: Providing Seeks to put a person in fear of force. it does not matter V is not fearful about it. the amount of force need not be great.
D was robbed by school boys he said he didn't feel scared. but still sought to but V in fear of force.
R v Bentham
Ratio: Any threat of force need not be real.
D had fingers in pocket to give impression he had a gun he robbed jewellery from his former employee. V handed money over as he thought the gun was real,
R v Hale
Ratio: Appropriation in robbery is a continuing act
Ratio: The threats and theft, although required to be almost simultaneous, may occur in different locations.
Two D's broke into a house one went upstairs to steal jewellery the other stayed downstairs with his hand over V's mouth. Court upheld conviction because the theft was still continuing when D used force.
R v Lockley
Ratio: Appropriation in robbery is a continuing act
D used force on a shopkeeper to escape after stealing cans of beer.
Corcoran v Anderton
Ratio: clarified difference between attempted robbery and robbery.
Two defendants tried to take a woman's handbag one struck her and the other tried to snatch it, she dropped it and they ran away empty handed. force and assumption of rights of the owner occurred meeting criteria for robbery.
Attorney General's reference No.9 of 1989 Lacey
Ratio: the need for deterrence in sentencing.
D robbed a post office with a baseball bat escaping with handfuls of cash he was tracked and sentenced to 30 months. this was changed to 5 years on appeal as a way of protecting small businesses.
Other sets by this creator