Burglary: Criminal Law and Effective Entry

Burglary is an offence on a lower floor percentage 9 of the Thefts Act, which is in 2 separate cancels. The graduation exercise sub section is s9(1)(a) which states a some bingle is immoral of burglary if he go intos any building or part of a building as a trespasser with the intent to steal, inflict telling bodily harm, or do unlawful damage to the building or anything in it. The second part is s9(1)(b) which says a soulfulness is guilty of burglary if having entered a building or part of a building as a trespasser, he steals or attempts to steal anything in the building or inflicts or attempts to inflict grievous bodily harm on any person in the building.The difference between the ii subsections is the target at the time of entry. For sample s9 (1)(a) the suspect essential imbibe the intention to steal, construct GBH or do unlawful damage at the time of entry. For s9 (1)(b) what the defendant intends to do is irrelevant the prosecution must prove that the defenda nt perpetrate or attempted to transmit Theft or GBH. So already in that location be some confusions with whether or non the defendant would be guilty of Burglary under s9(1)(a) or s9(1)(b). Entry is non defined in the Theft Act, solely at that place suck in been several subjects that help us on what the word Entry actually means.The first grounds on Entry was the case of Collins 1972. In this case the defendant had inebriated alcohol and decided he wanted to have sex. He saw a window that was open and climbed a ladder so he could have a look in. He saw there was a naked missy inside asleep on her bed. So he went down the ladder took off his clothes and climbed back up it to the girls room. She woke up and thought it was her boyfriend and helped him into the bedroom where they had full inter assembly line. Collins was convicted on s9(1)(a) as he entered with intention to rape.Before 2004 if someone was entering a building with the intention of rape it would be included in this section, but now it is under the Sexual Offences Act. Collins appealed to his condemnation as he said that he wasnt a trespasser when he entered the building as the girl invited him in. The hail of assembling quashed his conviction as there was no turn up that he was a trespasser and this is what is needed to be guilty of s9(1)(a) and of course Burglary. Brown was also another case that helped clarify what was regarded as entry. The defendant was standing outside but leaning in through a shop window rummaging through the goods.His feet and lower form was outside the shop. The Court of Appeal decided that he had effectively entered the building and therefore his conviction was upheld. However in the case of Ryan the need for effective entry was not followed. In his case the defendant the got trapped in the window he was trying to climb through into a dramatic art at 2. 30 am. His head and right arm was stuck inside the house and the rest of his body was outside. This cou ld scarcely be seen to be an effective entry. How ever the Court of Appeal upheld his conviction as they said the jury could find that the defendant had entered.So what actually qualifies as an effective entry is discovered in these cases. They have sharp by cases alike(p) Brown that you will still be guilty of burglary even if your whole body isnt inside the actual building. alike by cases like the Collins case if you have been invited in by anybody then you cannot be guilty of burglary as youre not a trespasser. The Theft Act does however give a description of what is considered as a building or part of a building. whole be places are considered as buildings so that would include houseboats or caravans, are considered as buildings/dwellings.To be a considered as a building the structure must have some degree of permanence. The main problem for the courts, have occurred where a structure such as a portacabin for example has been apply for remembering or office work. Moveabl e structures like this can be seen as buildings even though their use in particular places is only temporary. Section 9 (4) deals with what is considered to be a building and it also says buildings include live vehicles or vessels. Two cases that helped clarify what was considered as a building was the cases B and S v Leathley.In this case a 25 foot bulky freezer container had been kept in a farmyard for over two years. It was used as a storage facility. It rested on sleepers, had doors with locks and was connected to the electrical energy supply. This was considered a building because it had some degree of permanence as it was there for 2 years. In the case of Norfolk Constabulary v Seeking and Gould, a lorry trailer with wheels which had been used for over a year for storage, had locomote providing access and was connected to electricity supply, was held not be a building.The particular that it had wheels meant that it remained a vehicle. The courts have tried to clarify what a building is but it is still very unclear as some aspects of what the courts look at are still very tall(prenominal), such as how long the structure is there for. Part of building is used to cover situations in which the defendant may have consent to be in one part of the building and is therefore not a trespasser, but doesnt have permit to be in another part of the building. An example of this is the case of Walkington.In this case the defendant went into a counter area in a shop and opened a till. This area was clearly marked by a three-sided counter. The defendant was convicted of burglary under section 9(1)(a) as he was a trespasser when he went behind the counter. The critical point in this case was that the counter area was not an area where customers were permitted to go. Just like storerooms in shops customers are allowed to be in the shop but not the storeroom. I think that the courts have clarified this very well because of the examples that have used especially the ca se of Walkington.And the example of people not beingness allowed in storerooms but they are allowed in the shop. Also students are allowed in most places in school but they wouldnt be allowed to amble into their head teachers office. In order for the defendant to commit burglary they must enter as a trespasser. If they have permission to enter then that makes them not a trespasser as we have seen in the Collins case that I have explained above in the first paragraph. The original use of the word trespasser in law comes from the courteous law.It was assumed that the meaning of trespasser would be the same as in civil law that trespass is entry without the consent of the lawful resident physician of the building. The case of Collins made it clear that there was to a greater extent required that just the entry. They needed to prove that the defendant entered knowing he was a trespasser or was reckless as to whether or not he was entering the premise of another without permission. G oing beyond permission is where the defendant is given permission to entre but then goes beyond that permission and then is considered a trespasser.This is explained in the case of the Smith and Jones. In this case Smith and his friend went to Smiths fathers house in the middle of the night and took two television sets without the fathers permission. The father tell that his son would not be a trespasser in the house he had a general permission to entre. They were convicted for burglary as they had gone beyond their permission to be there. This is similar to the case of Barker v R, where one person was going away and asked the neighbour to watch the house and told them where the nominate was. The defendant used the key to entre and steal.He was found guilty of burglary. There are many situations where a person has permission to entre for a limited purpose. For example when people go to a concert they are only allowed there for a certain amount of time. The offence of Burglary has been given a description by Parliament, but it has been left to the courts to clarify all the key points. All the areas have been explained but some have been clarified more than others and as a consequence some areas are still very difficult to understand for example what is a building or part of a building, and going beyond permission.