• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

A2 Law Robbery Case Study. Discuss the criminal liability of Dave

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐Tajinder Singh Ranshi A2 Law ? Robbery Discuss the criminal liability of Dave Dave may have committed the offence of a robbery. This comes from Section 8 of the Theft Act 1968. The actus reus for this offence is the ar for a theft and the use or threat of force. We must then consider the 2 conditions before moving on to the mens rea. The mr for robbery is the same mr for a theft as well as the intention to use force to steal. The first stage which we look at is appropriation; this comes from section 3 of the Theft Act 1968. It is defined as assuming the right of the owner. In other words this is taking over one of the rights and using the item as your own. In the case of Pitham and Hehl it didn?t matter that the furniture was not physically removed from the owner?s house, by the defendants selling it they had assumed the owners? rights. We can further look at Morris we were told that if the defendant proved the assumption of any of the rights, then the owner of the goods can be prosecuted. ...read more.

Middle

The Court of Appeal held that the car could be regarded as 'property belonging to another' against the owner, since it was in the possession and control of the repairer. Once the ar for theft has been completed we then move on to force/ threat of force as seen in the cases of Robinson where there was no completed theft, therefore we couldn?t get a robbery and Corcoran and Anderton where the moment a theft was completed there was a robbery. Threat of Force has been used in the scenario as whilst the money is being loaded into the bag Dave screams ?Hurry up or I?ll use this gun?. In the case of B & R v DPP it was potentially a robbery as the victim didn?t need to fear force there just had to be a threat of force. The 2 conditions are linked to the use of force or threat of force. The first condition is whether force/ threat of force happened immediately before or during the incident. ...read more.

Conclusion

This can be linked back to the case as Dave robbed the money from the post office and then used it to his own disposal to go on the annual ski trip. Finally we move on to the intention to use force to steal. We must consider whether it was him aim or purpose to take the money from the post office. Looking back at the scenario we can establish that this was his aim and purpose and by doing so he would be able to go on the annual ski trip. If we use the case of Robinson we were told that if D had a genuine belief that he had a right in law to the money, then his actions were not dishonest under s2(1)(a) of the Theft Act 1968. If convicted of the robbery offence Dave could face a life sentence in prison. But if we are not able to establish a robbery then we are able to convict him of a theft offence under S7 of the Theft Act. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Criminal Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Criminal Law essays

  1. Law - Unit 3 - Mock Exam Question

    The virtual certainty test was laid down by the Court of Appeal in R v Nedwick. The defendant has a grudge against a woman and set her house alight.

  2. Human rights in Britain

    The Douglas's case was an example of Article 8: Right for Private and Family Life which states that every one has the right for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. The judge in this case did not recognise and did not create a freestanding right to

  1. Discuss the Criminal Liability of Dave for the murder of Edward

    It may not be evident that Dave directly intended the consequences of the act, Edward's death. Lord Bridge pointed out that it is quite possible to intend a result which you did not actually want, during R v Larsonneur. If the jury are unsatisfied that there is proof of direct

  2. List and explain the six most important cases for the law on insanity, explaining ...

    The Court of Appeal quashed his conviction. His conviction was quashed because of the external factor theory. Lord Lawton said ?A malfunctioning of the mind of transitory effect caused by the application to the body of some external factor such as violence, drugs, including anaesthetics, alcohol and hypnotic influences cannot fairly be said to be due to disease? The decision of Quick was important for two reasons.

  1. The History and Main Features of Criminal Law in the USA.

    Criminal homicide is when a person unlawfully and knowingly causes death to another person and is considered one of the most serious crimes in our society.Homicide is a common law crime crated by English judges rather than the English legislature.

  2. Critically discuss the Labour Governments record of crime control since coming to power in ...

    in 2004-5, and BCS crime levels were three times higher than the recorded crime levels, although most of it is not very serious; unreported crimes generally involve much lower levels of financial loss, damage, and injury than those reported to the police; in 2004-5, 71% of the comparable subset of

  1. Explain what is meant by the term causation in criminal law and assess how ...

    If it is found that the act did not make more than a minimal contribution to the death it will be ignored under what is called the de minimis principle. Contributory cases- the defendant?s acts need not be the sole cause or even the main cause of death, it being sufficient that it was a cause (Pagett).

  2. Explain the meaning of Actus reus and mens rea

    skill and expertise of the profession you are holding yourself out to be (Bolam v Friern hospital). Learners are expected to meet the standard of a qualified person as illustrated in Nettleship v Weston (learner driver). The judges look at the following factors in deciding if someone has not acted as a reasonable man: how risky was the activity?

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work