Criminal Unit 6

Question 1

What are the five essential elements that the prosecution must prove for the offence of theft?

Answer 1

Appropriation, property, belonging to another (actus reus), dishonesty, and an intention to permanently deprive (mens rea).

Question 2

According to the test in ‘Ivey v Genting Casinos’, what is the key issue in determining guilt for theft?

Answer 2

Whether the defendant’s conduct is held to have been dishonest.

Question 3

In the example of Aqib taking a £10 note with the intent to replace it, why might he still be considered to have an intention to permanently deprive?

Answer 3

He intended to deprive his employers permanently of the specific £10 note he had taken, even if he planned to replace it with another.

Question 4

Why was Della not guilty of theft of the car from Squertz Ltd?

Answer 4

Her conduct made it clear she had no intention of depriving the company permanently of the vehicle.

Question 5

In the scenario where Della takes a hired car from her husband Peter, why is her act considered an appropriation of property ‘belonging to another’?

Answer 5

Peter had possession and control of the car under the hire contract, which is sufficient for the property to be considered ‘belonging to’ him for the purposes of theft.

Question 6

What is the maximum sentence for theft when dealt with in the Crown Court?

Answer 6

Seven years’ imprisonment.

Question 7

Robbery is an aggravated form of which other offence?

Answer 7

Theft.

Question 8

What is the maximum sentence for robbery under s 8(2) of the Theft Act 1968?

Answer 8

Life imprisonment.

Question 9

What are the four key components the prosecution must prove for a conviction of robbery?

Answer 9

The defendant committed theft, used or threatened force on any person, did so immediately before or at the time of the theft, and did so in order to steal.

Question 10

Why can there be no charge of robbery without first establishing that a theft has occurred?

Answer 10

The commission of a theft is a key, foundational element of the offence of robbery.

Question 11

In ‘R v Vinall’ [2011], why were the defendants’ convictions for robbery quashed?

Answer 11

The prosecution could not prove the defendants had an intention to permanently deprive the victim of his property at the point when force was used.

Question 12

In the example of Gwyndaf, why could he not be convicted of robbery after knocking a book from Haydn’s hand?

Answer 12

He was not dishonest as he honestly believed the book was his, meaning the element of theft was absent, which is essential for a robbery conviction.

Question 13

What is the additional requirement that converts a simple theft into a charge of robbery?

Answer 13

The use of force (actual or threatened).

Question 14

According to ‘R v Dawson’ (1976), what is the legal status of the word ‘force’ in the context of robbery?

Answer 14

It is an ordinary word in common use, and it is a matter for the jury to determine whether force has been used.

Question 15

Does the amount of force used in a robbery need to be significant or substantial?

Answer 15

No, the amount of force used does not need to be significant; even jostling has been held to be sufficient.

Question 16

According to ‘R v Clouden’ [1987], can force directed against property rather than a person be sufficient for a charge of robbery?

Answer 16

Yes, there is no distinction between applying force to the person or to their property if it causes force on the person.

Question 17

In ‘P v DPP’ [2013], why was snatching a cigarette from a victim’s hand held to be theft and not robbery?

Answer 17

The act was done without making any contact with the victim, and therefore was not sufficient to be considered ‘force’ for robbery.

Question 18

According to s 8 of the TA 1968, must the threat or use of force in a robbery be directed against the owner of the property?

Answer 18

No, it may be against ‘any person’.

Question 19

The use or threat of force in a robbery must be ‘immediately before or at the time’ of the ____.

Answer 19

theft

Question 20

What legal principle was established in ‘R v Hale’ (1978) regarding the timing of force in a robbery?

Answer 20

Appropriation can be a continuing act, and if force is used while the appropriation is still ongoing, it is considered to be ‘at the time’ of the theft.

Question 21

In the example of Vincent knocking Raymond unconscious before deciding to take his phone, why is Vincent not guilty of robbery?

Answer 21

He did not use force ‘in order to steal’; the decision to take the phone was an afterthought following the assault.

Question 22

What is the mens rea of robbery regarding the theft element?

Answer 22

The defendant must have the mens rea of theft: dishonesty and an intention to permanently deprive.

Question 23

What is the presumed mens rea for the use of force in robbery, as suggested by Professor JC Smith?

Answer 23

The defendant must be at least reckless as to the use or threat of force.

Question 24

In Dawn’s scenario where she threatens Ichiro for a £20 debt, why might she not be guilty of robbery?

Answer 24

She may not be dishonest if she honestly believes she has a legal right to the money under s 2(1)(a) of the TA 1968, negating the theft element.

Question 25

What is the maximum term of imprisonment for burglary of domestic premises?

Answer 25

14 years.

Question 26

What is the maximum term of imprisonment for burglary of commercial premises?

Answer 26

10 years.

Question 27

What are the two distinct types of burglary under the Theft Act 1968?

Answer 27

Burglary under s 9(1)(a) (entering with intent) and burglary under s 9(1)(b) (committing an offence after entry).

Question 28

What are the four common elements required for both s 9(1)(a) and s 9(1)(b) burglary?

Answer 28

The defendant must (1) enter, (2) a building or part of a building, (3) as a trespasser, and (4) know or be reckless that they are a trespasser.

Question 29

Under s 9(1)(a) burglary, the defendant must enter as a trespasser with the intent to commit one of which three offences?

Answer 29

Theft, infliction of grievous bodily harm (GBH), or criminal damage.

Question 30

Under s 9(1)(b) burglary, what two offences (or their attempts) must the defendant commit or attempt after having entered as a trespasser?

Answer 30

Theft or the infliction of grievous bodily harm (GBH).

Question 31

What was the legal test for 'entry' established in 'R v Collins' [1973]?

Answer 31

The jury must be satisfied that the defendant made an 'effective and substantial entry'.

Question 32

In 'R v Brown' [1985], was the defendant's whole body required to enter the building for the entry to be 'effective'?

Answer 32

No, the court held his entry was 'effective' even though only the top half of his body was inside the shop window.

Question 33

What was the key finding in 'R v Ryan' [1996] regarding an 'effective' entry?

Answer 33

An entry can be effective even if the defendant is not in a position to commit the intended crime (e.g., being stuck in a window).

Question 34

In pre-1968 law, when was the insertion of an instrument into a building considered an 'entry' for burglary?

Answer 34

It was an entry if the instrument was used to commit an offence (like theft), but not if it was used merely to gain access.

Question 35

According to case law, what is a key characteristic of a 'building' for the purposes of burglary?

Answer 35

It must have some degree of permanence and be of a considerable size.

Question 36

Under s 9(4) of the TA 1968, what types of structures are explicitly included in the definition of a 'building'?

Answer 36

Inhabited vehicles and vessels, whether or not the inhabitant is present at the time.

Question 37

What did the court hold in 'R v Walkington' [1979] regarding what constitutes 'part of a building'?

Answer 37

An area with a physical demarcation (like a counter) from which the public is impliedly prohibited can be considered a 'part of a building'.

Question 38

For the criminal offence of burglary, what two things must be proven to establish the defendant was a 'trespasser'?

Answer 38

That the defendant entered without consent or permission (actus reus) and that they knew or were reckless as to this fact (mens rea).

Question 39

According to 'R v Jones and Smith' [1976], can a person with general permission to enter a building still be a trespasser?

Answer 39

Yes, if they enter knowing they are, or being reckless as to whether they are, exceeding the terms of the permission given (e.g., entering to steal).

Question 40

Does a shoplifter who enters a store with the pre-formed intention to steal commit burglary?

Answer 40

Yes, according to the principle in 'R v Jones and Smith', they are entering as a trespasser because they are exceeding the implied permission given to customers.

Question 41

According to 'R v Collins' [1973], at what point must the mens rea for trespassing exist for a burglary charge?

Answer 41

The defendant must have the mens rea (knowledge or recklessness) at the time of entry.

Question 42

For s 9(1)(a) burglary, does the defendant need to actually commit the intended offence (theft, GBH, or criminal damage)?

Answer 42

No, entering as a trespasser with the intention of doing so is sufficient.

Question 43

What principle regarding conditional intent in burglary was established in 'Attorney-General’s Reference (Nos 1 and 2 of 1979)'?

Answer 43

A conditional intent (e.g., to steal 'if there is anything worth stealing') is sufficient to establish the mens rea for burglary.

Question 44

For s 9(1)(b) burglary, when can the mens rea for the ulterior offence (theft or GBH) be formed?

Answer 44

It can be formed after the defendant has entered the building or part of a building.

Question 45

In the scenario with Aamir, why is he guilty of s 9(1)(a) burglary when he enters the drinks department of the supermarket?

Answer 45

He entered a separate part of the building as a trespasser with a conditional intent to steal, which is sufficient for the offence.

Question 46

In the scenario with Christina, why is she guilty of s 9(1)(b) burglary twice over?

Answer 46

Having entered as a trespasser, she committed two separate qualifying offences: she stole the silver and she inflicted GBH on David.

Question 47

Aggravated burglary under s 10 of the TA 1968 requires proof of a burglary (s 9) and what additional element?

Answer 47

That at the time of the burglary, the defendant had with them a firearm, imitation firearm, weapon of offence, or explosive.

Question 48

What is the maximum sentence for aggravated burglary?

Answer 48

Life imprisonment.

Question 49

What are the three categories that define a 'weapon of offence' under s 10(1)(b) of the TA 1968?

Answer 49

Any article (1) made, (2) adapted for use, or (3) intended by the person having it for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person.

Question 50

In 'R v Stones' [1989], did the defendant's claim that he carried a knife for self-defence negate a charge of aggravated burglary?

Answer 50

No, the court found that any intention not to use the knife during the burglary was irrelevant; mere possession was sufficient.

Question 51

For a s 9(1)(a) burglary, at what point must the defendant have the weapon with them to be guilty of aggravated burglary?

Answer 51

At the time of entry.

Question 52

For a s 9(1)(b) burglary, at what point must the defendant have the weapon with them to be guilty of aggravated burglary?

Answer 52

At the time the ulterior offence (theft, GBH, or an attempt) is committed.

Question 53

In 'R v O’Leary' (1986), why was the defendant guilty of aggravated burglary despite not bringing the knife into the house with him?

Answer 53

He armed himself with a knife from the kitchen before committing the theft, so he had the weapon 'at the time' of the s 9(1)(b) offence.

Question 54

In the scenario with Maurice, why is he not guilty of aggravated burglary in relation to the large knife he left in the bushes?

Answer 54

He did not have the knife with him at the time of committing the burglary, which for s 9(1)(a) is at the time of entry.

Question 55

Why was the hammer Maurice used to break in not considered a 'weapon of offence' for aggravated burglary?

Answer 55

It was intended for use to break in, not for causing injury, and it was not made or adapted for such use.

Question 56

Why was Maurice liable for aggravated burglary in relation to the child's toy pistol found in his pocket?

Answer 56

The definition of weapons for this offence includes 'imitation firearms... whether capable of being discharged or not'.

Question 57

In 'Corcoran v Anderton' (1980), when was the robbery considered complete?

Answer 57

The robbery was complete when the defendant tugged the victim's handbag, causing it to fall, as this was a sufficient appropriation.

Question 58

What is the key distinction between theft and robbery when a pickpocket stealthily takes a wallet versus when force is used after the theft is noticed?

Answer 58

In robbery, force must be used immediately before or at the time of stealing, and in order to steal; force used after the theft is complete constitutes a separate assault.

Question 59

According to s.8 of the TA 1968, is a threat of future force sufficient for robbery?

Answer 59

No, the threat must be of being 'then and there' subjected to force.

Question 60

What is the legal offence defined under s.8(2) of the Theft Act 1968?

Answer 60

Assault with intent to rob.

Question 61

In 'Norfolk Constabulary v Seekings and Gould' [1986], why were unhitched lorry trailers not considered 'buildings' for burglary?

Answer 61

They were on wheels and being used for temporary storage, so they were not of sufficient permanence to amount to buildings.

Question 62

What is the mens rea for trespass in burglary, as established in 'Collins' [1973]?

Answer 62

The defendant must know he is trespassing or be subjectively reckless as to whether he is trespassing.

Question 63

In 'Kelly' (1993), why was the use of a screwdriver to assault an occupant during a burglary considered a 'weapon of offence'?

Answer 63

Even if taken for breaking in, the defendant had the intent to use it to injure if the need arose at the time of the theft.

Question 64

What did the Court of Appeal in 'Chipunza v R' [2021] state a 'dwelling' is for the purpose of burglary sentencing?

Answer 64

A dwelling is a building or part of a building in which a person is living and makes their home.

Question 65

Does a building need to be inhabited at the precise time of a burglary to be considered a 'dwelling'?

Answer 65

No, a building that is obviously a dwelling (e.g. a furnished flat between tenants) does not cease to be one the moment it becomes unoccupied.