Robbery, Burglary & Aggravated Burglary (Crimes Act ss 75–77)

Section 75 – Robbery (Statutory Replacement of Common-Law Robbery)

Replaces the former common-law offence; now entirely governed by the Crimes Act.
Elements the prosecution must prove (all three must co-exist):
1. The accused steals (i.e., completes the elements of theft).
2. Timing requirement – the force or threat occurs:
- Immediately before, at the time of, or in order to steal.
1. Force component – the accused either:
- Uses actual force on another person, or
- Puts or seeks to put the person in fear of being subjected to force.
Mens rea overlay: intention to steal + intention/awareness regarding the force or threat.
Maximum penalty: 15 years’ imprisonment ( s 75(2) ).
Also captures assault with intent to rob – same max penalty; indictable.
Practical/ethical significance: Combines protection of property with personal security; reflects heightened culpability when violence accompanies theft.

Three statutory elements (all must be proved):
1. Entering a building (or part of a building).
- “Building” includes structures fitted with doors, windows, locks, security devices.
- “Part of a building” covers rooms/areas with restricted access (e.g., staff-only zones).
1. Entry is as a trespasser.
- No authority / permission, or reckless as to the absence of authority.
- Limited or conditional permission exceeded ⇒ person becomes a trespasser for the excess.
1. Entry made with intent to commit a prescribed offence punishable by \ge 5 years.
- Typical intents: theft, assault, criminal damage.
Clarifications & examples:
- Offender thinks it “highly likely” they lack permission yet proceeds ⇒ recklessness ⇒ trespass.
- Employee with access to sales floor enters locked office to steal payroll ⇒ becomes trespasser of that part.
Judicial questions when assessing intent:
- What precise offence was contemplated? Theft? Assault? Damage?
- Was there actually anything capable of being stolen? (cf. cases where rooms were empty.)
Penalty: Indictable; maximum 10 years’ imprisonment.
Philosophical rationale: Invasion of private space elevates gravity of property crimes.

Starts with the base burglary elements, then adds aggravating circumstances:
1. Offender possesses a firearm, imitation firearm, offensive weapon, explosive, or imitation explosive at the time of committing or entering for the burglary, or
2. Someone is present in the building/part of building at entry or during, and the offender knows, or is reckless whether, a person is present.
Statutory definitions (to remove ambiguity):
- “Explosive” – any article manufactured or intended to produce an explosion.
- “Firearm” – adopts definition from the Firearms Act.
- “Imitation explosive / firearm” – article that would reasonably be taken to be genuine.
- “Offensive weapon” – article made, adapted, or carried for causing injury/incapacitation.
Key policy point: Law focuses on perceived threat; victims cannot discern real vs imitation weapons.
Penalty: Indictable; maximum 25 years’ imprisonment. (Typically tried in the County Court; Supreme Court possible.)

Robbery (s 75) – max 15 yrs.
Burglary (s 76) – max 10 yrs.
Aggravated Burglary (s 77) – max 25 yrs.
Reflects escalation: theft + violence; trespass + intent; weapons/person-present combination.

Trespass: Core to burglary; overlaps with earlier lectures on property law—unauthorised entry infringes possessory rights.
Mens Rea tiers:
- Robbery: intent to steal + intent/knowledge re force.
- Burglary: intent to commit indictable offence (\ge 5 yrs) at time of entry.
- Aggravated Burglary: same as burglary plus knowledge/recklessness re weapon or person’s presence.
Timing of intent – must exist at entry; later-formed intent insufficent (cf. classic burglary cases).
Force vs Threat – threat need not be carried out; placing the victim in fear suffices.
Indictable nature – all three offences triable on indictment; jury determines facts, judge sentences.

Victim impact: Psychological trauma from invasion of space and threat of violence.
Security industry considerations: Architecture & locks used as evidence of “building” status.
Sentencing: Courts weigh degree of violence, actual injury, value of property, prior record.
Preventive policing: High penalties aim at deterrence; focus on armed entries and home invasions.

Theft (s 72) – foundational actus reus for robbery & many burglaries.
Assault (s 31, s 47) – often the contemplated offence within burglary; sentencing may involve cumulative charges.
Criminal Damage (s 197) – another common intended offence for burglary.
Evidence law crossover: Proof of intent often circumstantial—tools carried, attire (e.g., balaclavas), time of night.
Policy debate: Balancing high penalties with rehabilitation; addressing root causes (poverty, addiction).

Example 1 – Robbery: Offender grabs a wallet; simultaneously pushes the victim to the ground. All elements satisfied; 15-year max applies.
Example 2 – Burglary: Student climbs through unlocked window of closed library office intending to steal laptops (value >\$5,000). No weapon, nobody inside ⇒ burglary (not aggravated).
Example 3 – Aggravated Burglary: Two offenders break into a home at night with an imitation handgun; occupant asleep in bedroom. They know people are likely home. ⇒ s 77; 25-year max.

Always sequence elements: entry → trespass → intent.
For robbery, emphasise temporal link between theft and force.
Distinguish actual presence of victim (for robbery) from mere ownership of property (burglary).
Quote section numbers accurately in problem questions.
If the weapon is imitation, discuss statutory definition and victim perception.
Address both actus reus and mens rea; failure to prove either defeats the charge.
Penalties: Memorise 10/15/25-year maxima for quick comparison.