Robbery[a] is thecrime of taking or attempting to take anything of value by force, threat of force, or use of fear. According tocommon law, robbery is defined as taking the property of another, with the intent to permanently deprive the person of that property, by means of force or fear; that is, it is alarceny ortheft accomplished by anassault.[2] Precise definitions of the offence may vary between jurisdictions. Robbery is differentiated from other forms oftheft (such asburglary,shoplifting,pickpocketing, orcar theft) by its inherently violent nature (aviolent crime); whereas many lesser forms of theft are punished asmisdemeanors, robbery is always afelony in jurisdictions that distinguish between the two. Under English law, most forms of theft aretriable either way, whereas robbery istriable only on indictment. The word "rob" came viaFrench fromLate Latin words (e.g.,deraubare) ofGermanic origin, fromCommon Germanicraub "theft".
Among the types of robbery arearmed robbery, which involves the use of aweapon, andaggravated robbery, when someone brings with them a deadly weapon or something that appears to be a deadly weapon. Highway robbery or mugging takes place outside or in apublic place such as a sidewalk, street, or parking lot.Carjacking is the act of stealing a car from a victim by force.Extortion is the threat to do something illegal, or the offer to not do something illegal, in the event that goods are not given, primarily using words instead of actions.
Criminal slang for robbery includes "blagging" (armed robbery, usually of a bank), "stick-up" (derived from the verbal command to robbery targets to raise their hands in the air), and "steaming" (organized robbery on underground train systems).
In Canada, theCriminal Code makes robbery anindictable offence, subject to a maximum penalty oflife imprisonment. If the accused uses a restricted or prohibited firearm to commit robbery, there is a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for the first offence, and seven years for subsequent offences.[3]
A person is guilty of robbery if he or she steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force.[4]
Robbery is a statutory offence created by section 8(1) of theTheft Act 1968, which reads:
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 fear of being then and there subjected to force.[5]
This requires evidence to show atheft as set out in section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968. InR v Robinson[7] the defendant threatened the victim with a knife in order to recover money which he was actually owed. His conviction for robbery was quashed on the basis that Robinson had an honest, although unreasonable, belief (under Section 2(1)(a) of the Act) in his legal right to the money. See alsoR v Skivington [1968] 1 QB 166, [1967] 2 WLR 655, 131 JP 265, 111 SJ 72, [1967] 1 All ER 483, 51Cr App R 167, CA.
InR v Hale (1978)[8] the application of force and the stealing took place in many different locations, and it was not possible to establish the timing; it was held that the appropriation necessary to prove theft was a continuing act, and the jury could correctly convict of robbery. This approach was followed inR v Lockley (1995)[9] when the force was applied to a shopkeeper after property had been taken. It was argued that the theft should be regarded as complete by this time, andR v Gomez (1993),[10] should apply; the court disagreed, preferring to followR v Hale.
The threat or use of force must take place immediately before or at the time of thetheft. Force used after the theft is complete will not turn the theft into a robbery.
The words "or immediately after" that appeared in section 23(1)(b) of theLarceny Act 1916 were deliberately omitted from section 8(1).[11]
The bookArchbold said that the facts inR v Harman,[12] which did not amount to robbery in 1620, would not amount to robbery now.[13]
It was held inR v Dawson and James (1978)[14] that "force" is an ordinary English word and its meaning should be left to the jury. This approach was confirmed inR v Clouden (1985)[15] andCorcoran v Anderton (1980),[16] both handbag-snatching cases. Stealing may involve a young child who is not aware that taking other persons' property is not in order.
The victim must be placed in apprehension or fear that force would be used immediately before or at the time of the taking of the property. A threat is not immediate if the wrongdoer threatens to use force of violence some future time.
Robbery occurs if an aggressor forcibly snatched amobile phone or if they used a knife to make an implied threat of violence to the holder and then took the phone. The person being threatened does not need to be the owner of the property. It is not necessary that the victim was actually frightened, but the defendant must have put or sought to put the victim or some other person in fear of immediate force.[17]
The force or threat may be directed against a third party, for example a customer in a jeweller's shop.[18] Theft accompanied by a threat to damage property does not constitute robbery, but it may disclose an offence ofblackmail.
Dishonestly dealing with property stolen during a robbery constitutes an offence ofhandling.
Under current sentencing guidelines, the punishment for robbery is affected by a variety of aggravating and mitigating factors. Particularly important is how much harm was caused to the victim and how muchculpability the offender had (e.g. carrying a weapon or leading a group effort implies high culpability). Robbery is divided into three categories which are, in increasing order of seriousness: street or less sophisticated commercial, dwelling, and professionally planned commercial.[20]
Robbery generally results in a custodial sentence. Only a low-harm, low-culpability robbery with other mitigating factors would result in an alternative punishment, in the form of a high-levelcommunity order.[20] The maximum legal punishment isimprisonment for life.[21] It is also subject to the mandatory sentencing regime under theCriminal Justice Act 2003. Current sentencing guidelines advise that the sentence should be no longer than 20 years, for a high-harm, high-culpability robbery with other aggravating factors.
The "starting point" sentences are:
Low-harm, low-culpability street robbery: 1 year
Medium-harm, medium-culpability street robbery: 4 years
Medium-harm, medium-culpability professionally planned robbery: 5 years
High-harm, high-culpability street robbery: 8 years
Robbery was an offence under thecommon law of England. Matthew Hale provided the following definition:
Robbery is thefelonious and violent taking of any money or goods from the person of another, putting him in fear, be the value thereof above or under one shilling.[22]
Thecommon law offence of robbery was abolished for all purposes not relating to offences committed before 1 January 1969[23] by section 32(1)(a) of theTheft Act 1968.
(a) being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument, or being together with one other person or more, robs, or assaults with intent to rob, any person;
(b) robs any person and, at the time of or immediately before or immediately after such robbery, uses any personal violence to any person;
shall be guilty of felony and on conviction thereof liable to penal servitude for life, and, in addition, if a male, to be once privately whipped.
(2) Every person who robs any person shall be guilty of felony and on conviction thereof liable to penal servitude for any term not exceeding fourteen years.
(3) Every person who assaults any person with intent to rob shall be guilty of felony and on conviction thereof liable to penal servitude for any term not exceeding five years.
This section provided maximum penalties for a number of offences of robbery and aggravated robbery.[6]
If a robbery is foiled before it can be completed, an alternative offence (with the same penalty, given by section 8(2) of the 1968 Act) is assault; any act whichintentionally orrecklessly causes another to fear the immediate and unlawful use of force, with an intent to rob, will suffice.
In the United States, robbery is generally treated as an aggravated form of common-law larceny. Specific elements and definitions differ from state to state. The common elements of robbery area trespassory taking and carrying away of the personal property of another with the intent to steal from the person or presence of the victim by force or threat of force.[24]
The first six elements are the same as common-law larceny. It is the last two elements that aggravate the crime to common-law robbery.
from the person or presence of the victim – robbery requires that the property be taken directly from the person of the victim or from their presence. This is different from larceny, which simply requires that property be taken from the victim's possession, actual or constructive. Property is "on the victim's person" if the victim is actually holding the property, or the property is contained within clothing the victim is wearing or is attached to a victim's body, such as a watch or earrings.[25] Property is in a person's presence when it is within the area of their immediate control. The property has to be close enough to the victim's person that the victim could have prevented its taking if he/she had not been placed in fear or intimidation.[25]
by force or threat of force – the use of force or threat of force is the defining element of robbery. For there to be robbery there must be "force or fear" in perpetrating the theft.[26] Questions concerning the degree of force necessary for robbery have been the subject of much litigation. Merely snatching the property from the victim's person is not sufficient force unless the victim resists or one of the items is attached or carried in such a way that a significant amount of force must be used to free the item from the victim's person.[citation needed]
For robbery the victim must be placed in "fear" of immediate harm by threat or intimidation. The threat need not be directed at the victim personally. Threats to third parties are sufficient. The threat must be one of present rather than future personal harm. Fear does not mean "fright",[25] it means apprehension – an awareness of the danger of immediate bodily harm.
The maximum sentence for robbery in California is 9 years, according to Penal Code section 213(a)(1)(A).[27]
The threat or use of force does not have to take place immediately before or at the time of the theft.[28] Force used after the theft will turn the theft into a robbery unless the theft is complete. The theft is considered completed when the perpetrator reaches a place of temporary safety with the property.[29]
TheUnited Nations Office on Drugs and Crime notes "that when using the figures, any cross-national comparisons should be conducted with caution because of the differences that exist between the legal definitions of offences in countries, or the different methods of offence counting and recording". Also, not every crime is reported, meaning two things: (1) robbery rates appear lower than they actually are, and (2) the percentage of crime that is not reported is higher in some countries than others; for example, in one country 86% of the robberies were reported, whereas in another country only 67% of the robberies were reported. Crime also varies by certain neighborhoods or areas in each country, so a nationwide rate does not indicate the danger or safety everywhere in that country. A 1983 study by the Department of Justice estimated that the amount of robberies in the US at schools alone may reach one million a year, exceeding the National Crime Survey reported estimate.[30][31]
Robberies have been depicted, sometimes graphically, in various forms of media, and several robbers have becomepop icons, such asBonnie and Clyde andJohn Dillinger. Examples of media works focused on robberies include:
Wake Up and Die (1966) is an Italian crime drama film directed byCarlo Lizzani, based on the real life ofLuciano Lutring ("il solista del mitra", translation: "the submachine soloist"), who kept his weapon in a violin case.[34]
Luciano Lutring (30 December 1937 – 13 May 2013), known as "the submachine gun soloist" because he kept the weapon in a violin case, used that moniker as the title of his memoirIl solista del mitra. He was an Italian criminal, author, and painter who, when committing robberies, worked alone (which is rare for a robber).[35]
Lionel White's Bloodhound mysteries novel, No.116,Clean Break (1955)[36] was the basis for Stanley Kubrick's filmThe Killing (1956).[37]
Video gamesPayday: The Heist,Payday 2 andPayday 3 are games byOverkill Software where one of the main objectives is to steal items of monetary value at places such as banks, art galleries, armored trucks, and more.[38]
^Digitised copyArchived 2015-06-15 at theWayback Machine of section 14 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001. From the Office of the Attorney General.
^R v Clouden, unreported (C.A. No. 3897, 4 February 1985). For details see Griew, Edward.The Theft Acts 1968 and 1978. Fifth Edition. Sweet and Maxwell. 1986. Paragraphs 3-04 and 3-05 at page 80.
^Corcoran v Anderton (1980) 71 Cr App R 104, [1980] Crim LR 385,DC
^R v Khan LTL (9 April 2001) and Archbold 2006 21-101.
