Law Unit 4 Case Cards - Burglary

AQA Unit 4 Examination PM 23rd June

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Jo
  • Created on: 02-06-11 15:56

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

Entry

R v Collins (1973)

D climbed a ladder and observed P lying naked on her bed asleep. He descended, stripped naked and ascended again stopping on the window sill. P beckoned him in, thinking he was her boyfriend and they had sexual intercourse. P then realised this was not the case.

Held: It had to be proven he had entered before he was beckoned inside. On appeal his conviction was quashed as the facts were not clear as to whether he had made entry.

1 of 8

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

Entry

R v Brown (1985)

D entered a shop by breaking the shop window and reaching in with the upper part of his body, removed items from the display, his feet remaining outside on the ground for the entire time. The "entry" enabled him to commit the Theft which he had planned.

Held: It was enough for D to enter simply his means. The entry need not be "substantial" as long as it is "effective". Presumably this means "effective" for the purposes for which D is entering.

2 of 8

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

Entry

R v Ryan (1996)

V, an elderly householder, found D stuck in a downstairs window of their house. D's head and arm were inside of the window which had fallen on his neck and trapped him. The rest of his body was outside the window. D's argument that there was no entry because he could not have stolen anything from within the building on account of being stuck was rejected on appeal.

Held: D could enter even if only part of his body was within the premises and his inability to steal anything because he was trapped was totally irrelevant. Essentially denied that even effectiveness is necessary.

3 of 8

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

Building or Part of a Building

Norfolk Constabulary v Seekings and Gould (1986)

A lorry trailer with wheels, electricity and shutters used as a temporary store by a supermarket was broken into and items were stolen.

Held: The lorry trailer was not a building regardless of the fact it was not in working order as a trailer and had electricity as it was not a permanent enough structure.

4 of 8

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

Building or Part of a Building

B and S v Leathley (1979)

A freezer container which had been in the same place for three years in a farmyard, had its wheels taken off and sleepers underneath and had been broken into and items were stolen.

Held: The freezer container was held to be a building because it was not longer attached to a lorry and had electricity connected. The greater degree of permanence, the greater chance the structure will be classed as a building.

5 of 8

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

Building or Part of a Building

R v Walkington (1979)

D entered the space partly enclosed by a three-sided movable counter placed on the floor of a department store and tried to take cash from a cash till which was in fact empty. His conviction for burglary was upheld.

Held: The counter formed a physical partition and there was ample evidence on which the jury could conclude that the store had impliedly prohibited customers entering the counter space and the D knew of that prohibition. In other words, D entered a part of the building as a trespasser and with intent to steal.

6 of 8

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

As a Trespasser

R v Jones and Smith (1976)

One of the two defendants had permission to be in his father's house while his father was away, but neither of them had the father's permission to take his television sets and sell them.

Held: By entering the house with the intent to steal the television sets, they were going beyond the permission one of them had originally been given and so they became trespassers.

7 of 8

Burglary - Section 9 Theft Act 1968

As a Trespasser

R v Laing (1995)

D was found hiding in the storeroom of a shop after closing time. His conviction was quashed because at the time he entered the shop it could not be proved he was a trespasser.

Held: He had not entered the storeroom with the intent to steal. He entered it as a trespasser but not with intent steal from the storeroom but from the shop itself.

8 of 8

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »