Criminal - Burglary

Front 1

Burglary s.9 (1) (a)

Back 1

Defendant must:
1) Enter
2) A building (or part of a building)
3) As a trespasser
4) Intending to commit one of the offences under s.9 (2), theft, GBH or criminal damage.

Front 2

Burglary s.9 (1) (a)

Back 2

1) Enter
2) A building (or part of a building)
3) As a trespasser
4) Committing theft, GBH, or attempting to steal or inflict GBH.

Front 3

R v Brown (1985)

Back 3

Must be an ‘effective’ entry for the purpose of burglary, it is a question of fact for the jury to decide(R v Ryan – no defence that no crime could have been committed)

Hint 3

Defendant convicted of burglary, argued on appeal that as his whole body had not entered the building he had not entered. Held, defendant had entered the building, even though his lower half remained outside.

Front 4

R v Boyle (1954)

Back 4

Prior to Theft Act 1968, courts held that permission to enter obtained by fraud was not a true permission.

Hint 4

Someone entered a house I guess.

Front 5

R v Jones and Smith (1976)

Back 5

Court referred to R v Collins in which it was concluded that a defendant could be a trespasser where he had permission to enter for lawful purposes and he entered for an unlawful purpose.

Hint 5

Defendant had key to parent’s house, told to come and go as he pleased, he then used the key to steal from his parent’s house. Held, defendant had exceeded his permission to enter. Must have intention to exceed permission at the time of entry.

Front 6

R v Collins (1973)

Back 6

Mens rea for entry as a trespasser under s.9 (1)(a) was that at the time of entry the def must either know he was entering as a trespasser, or be reckless as to whether he was a trespasser.

Hint 6

Young man on window sill in socks and socks alone. Erect penis. Mistaken sex. Held, conviction of burglary with intent to rape quashed as when he entered the building he did not have the mens rea.

Front 7

Mens Rea (s.9 (1) (b))

Back 7

Unclear for burglary under s.9 (1) (b), R v Collins argued that the position is the same. However in (b) the offence is only complete once the defendant has committed or attempted to commit GBH or theft, so the prosecution will have to show that, at the point of entry into the building the defendant intended to trespass or was reckless. Then, on proof of GBH or theft the s.9 (1) (b) offence will be complete.

Front 8

S.9 (4) TA

Back 8

clear that building includes inhabited vehicles and vessels, whether or not the inhabitant is in at the time of the burglary. Buildings must have some degree of permanence; they do not have to be inhabited; only vehicles or vessels need be inhabited

Front 9

R v Walkington (1979)

Back 9

Question for juries to decide on facts, but likely that if areas are roped off, or marked by a counter or similar structure, they will amount to a separate part of the building.

Hint 9

Defendant walked around a three-sided counter in a shop to get to the till, convicted of burglary, there was a physical demarcation suggesting the public were excluded from this area. Held, appeal dismissed.

Front 10

AG Ref 1969

Back 10

A conditional intent to steal etc. was sufficient to find defendant guilty of burglary.