An application to treat a notice of abandonment as a nullity was dismissed where it was clear from the evidence that the applicant had made a deliberate and informed decision to abandon his application for leave to appeal against his conviction. That abandonment was irrevocable.
The necessary intention within the Theft Act 1968 s.6(1) could be demonstrated at the time of the taking of property or when it was later abandoned, but an intention formed only at the time of abandonment could not support a conviction for robbery.
There had been sufficient evidence before a magistrates’ court for it properly to conclude that items left outside charity shops that a defendant had taken had belonged to someone other than the defendant at the time of appropriation, and so it had been right to commit the case to the Crown Court for trial.
A court had erred in refusing to allow an appeal to be abandoned where the appellant’s wish for an abandonment had been indicated to the court after the appeal had been called on and he had been identified, but no steps had been taken to pursue the appeal hearing.
Where an applicant had been told authoritatively but wrongly that he was not serving an indefinite sentence and he abandoned his appeal, the court was entitled to treat that abandonment as a nullity and reinstate the appeal.
On a claim for wrongful interference with a car found by the police to have been abandoned, the correct approach was not whether the vehicle had been abandoned but whether the vehicle had been left in a position that suggested to the police constable that it had been abandoned.