R v Collins
For burglary, the defendant must enter as a trespasser, knowing or being reckless that he is trespassing, and the entry must be effective and substantial.
Facts
Mr Collins, naked except for his socks, climbed a ladder to the window of a young woman's bedroom, intending to have sex with her, with or without her consent. She woke and, seeing a naked man at the window and believing him to be her boyfriend, beckoned him in, and they had sex. It was unclear whether he was already inside the room when she invited him in or still on the windowsill. When she realised he was not her boyfriend, she slapped him. He was convicted of burglary with intent to commit rape.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction. Edmund Davies LJ said that, for burglary, there must be an effective and substantial entry as a trespasser, and that the defendant must know that he is entering as a trespasser or be reckless as to whether he is doing so. If Mr Collins was still on the windowsill when the woman invited him in, he did not enter as a trespasser, because he entered with her permission. The jury had not been directed on these points, so the conviction was unsafe.
Related cases on theft, robbery, burglary and fraud
- Attorney General's Reference (No 1 of 1983) [1985] QB 182
- Corcoran v Anderton (1980) 71 Cr App R 104
- Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391
- Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1972] AC 626
- Oxford v Moss (1979) 68 Cr App R 183
- R v Barton and Booth [2020] EWCA Crim 575, [2021] QB 685
- R v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053
- R v Gomez [1993] AC 442
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
