E-law cases
 
Custom Search
   Home      R v Smith & Ors 2011

R v Smith & Ors [2011] 1 Cr App R 30 Court of Appeal

Smith arranged to meet Chesterfield Jordan in order to buy some heroin from him. When Jordan arrived at the meeting point, the other appellants, Plummer and Haines, emerged from an alleyway where they had been hiding and attacked Jordan. Plummer put a knife to his throat and Haines punched him to the ground. Once Jordan was on the ground all three kicked him and demanded the heroin.  Jordan handed over the heroin and they ran off. The three appellants were convicted of robbery and appealed on the grounds that drugs did not constitute property for the purposes of the Theft Act since the possession of it was unlawful.

Held:

Appeal dismissed. The convictions were upheld.

S.4 Theft Act 1968 defines property as including all tangible property, whilst some exceptions are set out in the Act such as real property and wild animals, the exceptions do not extend to property in unlawful possession.

Back to lecture outline on theft in criminal law