Application for judicial review of refusal of bail.

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 109 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.248934

Application for review of extension of custody time limits.

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2208 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.244853

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 953 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Drug Trafficking Act 1994 42

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.226869

Application for judicial review of decision not to extend custody time limits.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2191 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.244859

The defendant challenged admission of a statement made in his presence but not contradicted by him.
Held: The court must first ask whether the defendant’s reaction was relevant. Where acquiescence was alleged, three considerations arose: 1) Could a jury properly directed conclude that the defendant did adopt the statement, 2) Was it sufficiently relevant to warrant inclusion, and 3) would the admission be so unfair as to warrant its exclusion. The case satisfied those tests and the appeal failed.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers LCJ, Rafferty J, Mackay J

Citations:

Times 17-Nov-2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Collins and Keep v Regina CACD 28-Jan-2004
When arrested with a co-defendant, C had said nothing as his co-defendant gave a false explanation. He now appealed his conviction saying that the judge had left with the jury the question of whether he was adopting that lie by his own silence.
Cited – Rex v Christie HL 1914
The House considered the admissibility in evidence of a false statement made in the defendant’s presence, but uncontradicted by him: ‘the rule of law undoubtedly is that a statement made in the presence of an accused person, even on an occasion . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.235142

Section 3 of the 1957 Act spells out the function of the judge and jury at the trial. The section is dealing with the trial, not the appeal.

Judges:

Glidewell LJ

Citations:

[1995] Crim LR 425

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Considered – Regina v Whitfield CACD 1976
The court declined to apply the proviso to allow conviction of the defendant where the judge had given a msidirection, saying that to do so would be to determine the issue otherwise than by verdict of the jury. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Van Dongen and Another, Regina v CACD 5-Jul-2005
The defendant brothers appealed convictions for murder. They had pleaded self defence. The injuries on the deceased suggested a substantial number of wounds were inflicted when he was in a curled up defensive post.
Held: The provocation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.228495

Where an identification depends upon the recognition by the witness of a person or persons previously known to him, the jury should be reminded that there is remains a risk for mistake in such cases. Many people have experienced thinking that they had seen someone in the street whom they knew, only to discover that they were wrong.

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

[1991] Crim LR 620

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Turnbull and Another etc CCA 9-Jun-1976
The defendants appealed against their convictions which had been based upon evidence of visual identification.
Held: Identification evidence can be unreliable, and courts must take steps to reduce injustice. The judge should warn the jury of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Langford and Another v The State PC 11-May-2005
(Dominica) The appellants appealed convictions for together having kicked a man to death. They said the convictions were founded on unreliable identification evidence.
Held: The judge had made several misdirections, as to the reliability of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.228788

The operation of section 35 is not to be reduced or marginalised.

Judges:

Lord Taylor of Gosforth CJ

Citations:

(1995) 161 JP 16

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Becouarn HL 28-Jul-2005
At his trial for murder, the defendant had not given evidence, and the court had allowed the jury to draw proper inferences under s35.
Held: The JSB direction ‘on drawing inferences [i]s sufficiently fair to defendants, emphasising as it does . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.229102

The defendant was not to be allowed to cross-examine the complainaint in a sexual offence case as to her previous sexual history, where there was no evidential basis for the cross-exmination.

Judges:

Keene LJ

Citations:

[2002] 1 WLR 632

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Regina v Abdeirahman CACD 12-May-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for rape saying that the judge had wrongly excluded cross examination of the complainanant, in which he had wanted to establish previous false complaints by her.
Held: The appeal failed. The defendant had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.228498

The defendant sought to have admitted expert evidence on the possible effect of hypoglycaemia on the formation of an intention: ‘. . we do not know what, if any, effect mild hypoglycaemia can have upon a man’s ability to form an intent, and without that expert evidence the jury were deprived of assistance in a field where their ordinary experience did not enable them to judge for themselves.’

Judges:

Russell LJ

Citations:

(1991) 93 Cr App R 382

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Henry, Regina v CACD 29-Jun-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for soliciting to murder and conspiracy to murder. An expert’s opinion now described him as of low intelligence and vulnerable to the sort of pressure of which he complained.
Held: The expert evidence had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.227983

Each defendant appealed against the imposition of an extended sentence of imprisonment.
Held: The The provisions were unduly complicated and about to change again. Courts would see their way clear by focussing on the offence for which the extended sentence was to be considered, and bearing in mind that the purpose of this particular form of sentence was not primarily to protect the public. The courts should also bear in mind the importance of the date of the offence and the difference drawn between violent and sexual offences. Nelson should still be followed. Prosecuting counsel should be equipped at court to give guidance and assistance to the judge if required, and should bear in mind the availability of the slip rule if a mistake was discovered later.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Jibbs, Stanley Burnton JJ

Citations:

Times 10-May-2005

Statutes:

Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 86

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Webb, Attorney General’s Reference (No 52 of 2003) CACD 9-Dec-2003
The reference was for an unduly lenient sentence for offences of gross indecency with a child and attempted rape.
Held: Even experienced judges could be unaware of guideline cases. In this case Millberry and the Reference 91 etc of 2002 would . .
Cited – Regina v Nelson CACD 24-Oct-2001
The court gave guidelines on sentencing violent or sex offenders. The court should consider in order the commensurate sentence, whether any longer sentence was needed to protect the public, and if the sentence would be four year or longer, whether . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.224767

The judge’s discretion to exclude a statement on the ground that its admission would be unfair is a matter of degree, but the first and principal decision is whether the prosecution has proved that it was made voluntarily. The court discussed what would be ‘oppressive’ in questioning by the police, and adopted part of a speech given by Lord MacDermotte: ‘questioning which by its nature, duration or other circumstances (including the fact of custody) excites hopes (such as the hope of release) or fears, or so affects the mind of the subject that his will crumbles and he speaks when otherwise he would have stayed silent.’ and ‘what may be oppressive to one or someone inexperience in the ways of the world may turn out not to be oppressive when one finds that accused person is of tough character and an experienced man of the world.’
Edmund Davies LJ said: ‘As we have already indicated, the criticism directed in the present case against the police is that their interrogation constituted ‘oppression’. This word appeared for the first time in the Judges’ Rules of 1964, and it closely followed the observation of the Lord Chief Justice (Lord Parker) in Callis v. Gunn (1963) 48 Cr. App. R. 36 at page 40 condemning confessions ‘obtained in an oppressive manner’.’

Judges:

Edmund Davies LJ

Citations:

(1972) 56 Cr App R 151, [1972] 1 WLR 260, [1972] 1 All ER 1114

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Mushtaq HL 21-Apr-2005
The defendant was convicted of fraud charges. He sought to have excluded statements made in interview on the basis that they had been obtained by oppressive behaviour by the police. His wife was very seriously ill in hospital and he had made the . .
Cited – Regina v Fulling CACD 1987
It was alleged that evidence had been obtained by police oppression. She had at first refused to answer questions, but an officer talked to her during a break between interviews, telling her that her lover had been having an affair. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.224428

The sentencing judge had indicated in chambers to defence counsel, that he was minded not to impose a custodial sentence if a plea was entered to a mooted charge. Prosecuting counsel was present but did not contribute to the discussion although he said while leaving chambers, ‘Your Honour, it sounds, therefore, as if the matter can be resolved’. When the Attorney General sought an increase in the sentence, defence counsel said it would be an abuse for the Attorney General, standing in the shoes of the prosecution, to suggest that the course in which the prosecution had acquiesced was inappropriate on the basis that it would result in a sentence which was unduly lenient. Counsel relied on the decision in Attorney General’s Reference (Nos 8, 9 and 10 of 2002)
Held: ‘It seems to us that the passage upon which Miss Munro relies is a passage which must be considered with some care. It clearly has to be read in conjunction with what Lord Bingham said in Robinson and what Rose LJ said in Stokes. It is undoubtedly right that if the prosecution has acted in ways in which it could be said that it had played a part in giving the offender the relevant expectation, then clearly it would not be appropriate for this court to permit the Attorney General to argue that the sentence which was imposed, partly as a result of what the prosecution had said or done, was unduly lenient. But we have, it seems to us, to look in the light of that principle at the facts of each particular case.’

Judges:

Latham LJ

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Crim 1239

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (Number 8 of 2004) (Dawson and Others) CANI 15-Apr-2005
Defendants had been convicted of offences involving supply of cannabis and cocaine, including the evasion of import controls and conspiracy. The sentences were appealed as too lenient.
Held: Where a prosecutor was aware that a plea of guilty . .
Cited – Rooney and Others, Re Attorney General’s Reference (Number 1 of 2005) CANI 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted or armed robbery. The Attorney General appealed against the sentences saying they were too lenient. Rooney argued that his plea of guilty had been after an indication by the judge and the reference was misguided. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.224220

R appealed his conviction for unlawfully supplying a controlled drug. Officers claimed to have seen him, but the court agreed not to order disclosure of their observation location.
Held: The appeal failed. It was important not to discourage members of the public from co-operating with the police. In the same way that an officer cannot be obliged to give the name of his informant, he was not to be asked to reveal information which would lead to such disclosure. It was for the defendant to show good reason why such information was required.

Citations:

[1986] QB 861

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Attorney General v Briant 1846
. .
Cited – Regina v Hennessy (Timothy) 1978
The court described the duty on a prosecutor to disclose evidence: ‘those who prepare and conduct prosecutions owe a duty to the courts to ensure that all relevant evidence of help to an accused is either led by them or made available to the . .
Cited – Webb v Catchlove 1886
. .
Cited – Marks v Beyfus 1890
The plaintiff claimed damages for malicious prosecution. He called the Director of Public Prosecutions as a witness, who refused to identify the name of the person who had given him the information on which he had acted against the plaintiff.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223565

The defendant in question had not give evidence.
Held: The correct approach to be followed by the judge was: ‘What the jury needed to be reminded of in his defence was relevant matter contained in his pre-trial statements and interviews with the police – copies of those documents were in their hands – and possibly such assistance, if any, as counsel had been able to extract from the Crown’s witnesses in cross-examination . . We must make this clear yet again, namely that it is no part of a judge’s duty to build up a defence for someone who has not chosen to give the jury the benefit of his version of material circumstances and events. The judge’s obligation is limited to reminding the jury, in summary form, of what the defendant is said to have stated as to those matters at some time or another pre-trial and what assistance, if any, the Crown’s witnesses have provided.’

Citations:

(1993) 97 Cr App R 349

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 74

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Shanks CACD 19-Mar-2003
The appellant appealed his conviction for murder. He had shot his lover as she walked away from an argument. The fact of his conviction following mention of a guilty plea to possession of the firearm was complained of.
Held: The judge had . .
Cited – Hussain, Regina v (No 2) CACD 28-Apr-2016
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223485

After retirement, the jury requested, and was inadvertently supplied with a copy of a statement made by a witness to the police. The statement had been used by defence counsel for the purposes of cross-examination, but the document itself had not been exhibited.
Held: The court questioned the absolute nature of the observation that a conviction would inevitably be quashed in circumstances where the jury had received evidence after retirement, not on the basis that the principle was in doubt, but as to whether every breach of it would result in the quashing of the conviction. The breach would be an irregularity, which depending on the circumstances might or might not result in the application of the proviso to the section. In this case the proviso was applied.
Although no additional evidence should be placed before the jury after their retirement, it is perfectly permissible for them to have a repeat of evidence which had already been given.

Citations:

[1976] 62 CAR 194

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 291)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Karakaya CACD 16-Feb-2005
No Internet Research for juror
After conclusion of the trial, the jury bailiff discovered notes in the jury room which indictated that the jury, after they had retired for their verdict, had read and discussed notes obtained by a juror from the Internet relating to the case.
Applied – Regina v Maggs CACD 1990
The charge was of causing death by dangerous driving. Sketch plans with measurements were supplied to the jury. They asked for and were given a tape measure. The defendant appealed.
Held: Though once they retired the hjury should not be given . .
Cited – Regina v Imran, Hussain CACD 9-Jun-1997
The two appellants were among four convicted of robbery. Imran complained that the police had not disclosed the existence of CCTV coverage before the interview, and Hussain that a copy of the surveillance tape had been given to the jury after . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223470

Lord Widgery CJ said: ‘A denial does not become an admission because it is inconsistent with another denial.’

Judges:

Lord Widgery CJ

Citations:

(1979) 69 Cr App R 365

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Sat-Bhambra CACD 1989
The defendant was accused of importing heroin. He challenged use of his recorded interviews saying he was suffering hypoglycaemia from his diabetes at the time. The judge excluded later interviews for this reason, but the defendant challenged the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223675

After retirement, the jury requested provision of scales which were given. The defendants faced an accusation of importing cannabis of a certain weight, and claimed to have been unaware of the presence of the cannabis in their bags.
Held: Once they had retired, no additional evidence should be supplied to the jury. The provision of the scales was a material irregularity. The request suggested that they were having difficulty accepting the prosecution case, and they should not have been allowed to settle such a dispute by an experiment of their own. There had been a material irregularity.

Citations:

(1989) 89 Cr App R 273

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Thomas (Horatio Gerald) CACD 9-Feb-1987
The jury had, after retirement, requested and been given a map which had not been referred to in the case. Counsel were not consulted.
Held: The use of the map was a material irregularity: ‘It is hardly necessary to say that an action of this . .

Cited by:

Doubted in Part – Regina v Maggs CACD 1990
The charge was of causing death by dangerous driving. Sketch plans with measurements were supplied to the jury. They asked for and were given a tape measure. The defendant appealed.
Held: Though once they retired the hjury should not be given . .
Cited – Regina v Karakaya CACD 16-Feb-2005
No Internet Research for juror
After conclusion of the trial, the jury bailiff discovered notes in the jury room which indictated that the jury, after they had retired for their verdict, had read and discussed notes obtained by a juror from the Internet relating to the case.
Cited – Regina v Imran, Hussain CACD 9-Jun-1997
The two appellants were among four convicted of robbery. Imran complained that the police had not disclosed the existence of CCTV coverage before the interview, and Hussain that a copy of the surveillance tape had been given to the jury after . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223471

The defendant was accused of importing heroin. He challenged use of his recorded interviews saying he was suffering hypoglycaemia from his diabetes at the time. The judge excluded later interviews for this reason, but the defendant challenged the use of the first few tapes since the doctor said he might be suffering in this way.
Held: Once the evidence had been heard, the judge had no continuing discretion to exclude under s76 or s78. His only remaining discretion was under s82(3) where he might exclude if the material was more prejudicial than probative. Lord Lane CJ: ‘First, were the answers given by the appellant upon the interviews properly to be described as a confession or confessions? Section 82(1) of the Act defines confession as follows: ”confession’ includes any statement wholly or partly adverse to the person who made it, whether made to a person in authority or not and whether made in words or otherwise.’ His answers upon the interviews, the tapes of which the jury heard, were, as his counsel described, exculpatory. Their principal damaging effect was to demonstrate that the appellant was evasive and prevaricating and that many of the statements which he made proved eventually to be false. The question therefore arises: can a statement be described as wholly or partly adverse to the person making it, when it is intended by the maker to be wholly exculpatory and appears to be so on its face, but becomes damaging at the trial because, for example, its contents can by then be shown to be evasive or false or inconsistent with the maker’s evidence on oath?
. . . The words of the section do seem prima facie to be speaking of statements adverse on the face of them. The section is aimed at excluding confessions obtained by words or deeds likely to render them unreliable, i.e. admissions or partial admissions contrary to the interests of the defendant and welcome to the interrogator. They can hardly have been aimed at statements containing nothing which the interrogator wished the defendant to say and nothing apparently adverse to the defendant’s interests. If the contentions of the appellant in the present case are correct, it would mean that the statement ‘I had nothing to do with it’ might in due course become a ‘confession’, which would be surprising, with or without section 82(1). . . . We are inclined to the view that purely exculpatory statements are not within the meaning of section 82(1). We are supported in this view by the learned author of Cross on Evidence, 6th ed., p 544. The same view is taken by Andrews and Hirst on Criminal Evidence, paragraph 19.04. They cite the words of Lord Widgery CJ in Pearce (1979) 69 Cr App R 365, where he says ‘A denial does not become an admission because it is inconsistent with another denial.’ . . . In so far as they express a contrary view we respectfully dissent from the views of the Supreme Court of Canada in Piche v R (1970) 11 DLR 700, and of Chief Justice Warren in Miranda v Arizona 384 U.S. 436, 477 (1975), where he said that such statements ‘are incriminating in any meaningful sense of the word.’ . . . However in the light of what we have to say hereafter, we do not need to come to any firm conclusion on this aspect of the case . . .’

. . . and as to the court’s powers: ‘He may, if he thinks that the matter is not capable of remedy by a direction, discharge the jury; he may direct the jury to disregard the statement; he may by way of direction point out to the jury matters which affect the weight of the confession and leave the matter in their hands.’

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

(1989) 88 Cr App R 55

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76 78 82(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Pearce CACD 1979
Lord Widgery CJ said: ‘A denial does not become an admission because it is inconsistent with another denial.’ . .

Cited by:

Affirmed – Hasan, Regina v HL 17-Mar-2005
The House was asked two questions: the meaning of ‘confession’ for the purposes of section 76(1) of the 1984 Act, and as to the defence of duress. The defendant had been involved in burglary, being told his family would be harmed if he refused. The . .
Applied – Regina v Park CACD 1994
The defendant had been stopped by police officers whilst driving a car which contained property stolen in burglaries. The question arose whether a statement was a confession.
Held: The court applied the interpretation of section 82(1) . .
Cited – Regina v Mushtaq HL 21-Apr-2005
The defendant was convicted of fraud charges. He sought to have excluded statements made in interview on the basis that they had been obtained by oppressive behaviour by the police. His wife was very seriously ill in hospital and he had made the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223674

An appellant should not be allowed to make tactical decisions not to object to something at his trial, but to save it for an appeal: ‘an appellant should not be able to blow hot and cold in this way.’ and ‘The appellant had himself been made aware of the contents of the note. He, having been made aware of the contents of the note through his counsel, did not dissent from the course proposed by the judge, namely to take a verdict. As was pointed out in argument, for him now to seek to challenge that verdict means that he waited to see whether the verdict was favourable or not, and only sought to challenge the right of the jury to bring in a verdict when he has ascertained, in relation to one count, that the verdict is unfavourable to him. It cannot be satisfactory that in a situation of this sort an appellant should blow hot and cold, albeit through counsel.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf CJ

Citations:

[1991] Crim LR 844

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Smith, Regina v Mercieca HL 16-Feb-2005
A member of the jury wrote to the judge saying that other members were failing to discharge their duties properly. Smith took a tactical decision not to seek a retrial. The judge saw counsel in chambers, after which the jury were reminded of their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.222819

Discussions between witnesses should not take place, and the statements and proofs of one witness should not be disclosed to any other witness.

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 3004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Momodou and Limani CACD 2-Feb-2005
The defendants appealed against their convictions and sentence for violent disorder and assault during an uprising at Yarl’s Wood Detention centre. It was said that witnesses had been coached, other defence witnesses had been returned to their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.222925

The witness had failed to attend court to give evidence against his estranged wife on a charge against her of assaulting him. He had been held in contempt and refused bail pending the determination of his own guilt.
Held: The judge who had faced the defendant on his first being brought before the court had deferred the matter to the judge who would hear the case against the wife, and refused bail in the interim. There were uncertainties as to the procedure to be followed, since to the right to apply to a judge in chambers had now been abolished. Such cases required a speedy disposal and a delay of seven days was unacceptable.

Judges:

Maurice Kay LJ, Davis, Filed JJ

Citations:

Times 28-Feb-2005, [2005] EWCA Crim 370, [2005] 2 Cr App R 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wilkinson v S and Lord Chancellor’s Department CA 4-Feb-2003
The appellant challenged his imprisonment for contempt of court. At and after a family court hearing he had verbally and physically assaulted other parties. He had been detained overnight, then sentenced to six months imprisonment.
Held: Where . .

Cited by:

Cited – Haw and Another v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court Admn 12-Dec-2007
The defendants appealed convictions for contempt of court, on the basis of having wilfully interrupted the court. The respondent said that no appeal lay.
Held: The statute was ambiguous, and ‘there can be no good reason why a person convicted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Contempt of Court

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223320

Statements and proofs of one witness should not be disclosed to any other witness.

Citations:

[1971] CAR 244

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Momodou and Limani CACD 2-Feb-2005
The defendants appealed against their convictions and sentence for violent disorder and assault during an uprising at Yarl’s Wood Detention centre. It was said that witnesses had been coached, other defence witnesses had been returned to their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.222924

The defendants appealed convictions for conspiracy to import cannabis resin. The prosecution had been refused consent to present certain evidence, but the judge went on later to refer to material from the excluded evidence in his summing up.
Held: The appeals succeeded. The inadvertent reference to the evidence was of such importance to the central issues as to be incapable of correction even by strong judicial direction.
Auld LJ set out the principles to be applied after the improper admission of potentially prejudicial evidence: ‘Whether or not to discharge the jury is a matter for evaluation by the trial judge on the particular facts and circumstances of the case, and this court will not lightly interfere with his decision. It follows that every case depends on its own facts and circumstances, including: 1) the important issue or issues in the case; 2) the nature and impact of improperly admitted material on that issue or issues, having regard, inter alia to the respective strengths of the prosecution and defence cases; 3) the manner and circumstances of its admission and whether and to what extent it is potentially unfairly prejudicial to a defendant; 4) the extent to and manner in which it is remediable by judicial direction or otherwise, so as to permit the trial to proceed. We repeat, all these matters and their combined effect are very much an evaluative exercise for the trial judge in all the circumstances of the case. The starting point is not that the jury should be discharged whenever something of this nature is put in evidence through inadvertence. Equally, there is no sliding scale so as to increase the persuasive onus on a defendant seeking a discharge of a jury on this account according to the weight or length of the case or the stage it has reached when the point arises for determination. The test is always the same, whether to continue with the trial would or could, by reason of the admission of the unfairly prejudicial material, result in an unsafe conviction.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld Mr Justice Hedley The Honourable Mr Justice Owen

Citations:

Times 06-Nov-2006, [2005] EWCA Crim 84, [2007] 1 Cr App R 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Mitcham v The Queen PC 16-Mar-2009
(Saint Christopher and Nevis) The applicant appealed against his sentence of death following his conviction for murder. He had been granted a stay of execution pending the appeal to the board and had since been given leave to appeal against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.221743

Citations:

(1984) 80 Cr App R 253

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Stonehouse HL 1977
The defendant had been charged with attempting to obtain property by deception by fabricating his death by drowning in the sea off Miami in Florida. The final act alleged to constitute the offence occurred outside the jurisdiction of the English . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wang, Regina v HL 10-Feb-2005
The appellant was waiting for a train when his bag was stolen. After a search, the thief tried to deter the appellant from calling the police by suggesting that the bag contained items the appellant should not be carrying. From the bag the appellant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.222703

The court considered the effect of a prior acquittal when the Crown on a subsequent prosecution sought to rely on part of a confession, the other part of which the earlier jury had not accepted.

Citations:

(1983) 77 Cr App R 70

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Terry CACD 21-Dec-2004
The prosecutor had a alleged a conspiracy basing the charge on a conversation in a car. The court rejected the admisibility of evidence of a voice recognition expert, and the defendant was acquitted on direction. He then said that in the absence of . .
Cited – Regina v Z (Prior acquittal) HL 22-Jun-2000
The defendant on a charge of rape had been tried and acquitted of the rape of different women on three previous occasions in three separate trials. The prosecution wished to call those three complainants to give similar fact evidence in support of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.221712

Citations:

(1987) 92 Cr App R 50

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Stonehouse HL 1977
The defendant had been charged with attempting to obtain property by deception by fabricating his death by drowning in the sea off Miami in Florida. The final act alleged to constitute the offence occurred outside the jurisdiction of the English . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wang, Regina v HL 10-Feb-2005
The appellant was waiting for a train when his bag was stolen. After a search, the thief tried to deter the appellant from calling the police by suggesting that the bag contained items the appellant should not be carrying. From the bag the appellant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.222704

Subject to a judge’s discretion to order separate trials in the interests of justice, there are powerful public reasons why joint offences should be tried jointly.

Judges:

Lord Widgery LCJ

Citations:

(1976) 64 Cr App R 172

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .
Cited – Regina v Cairns; Regina v Zaldi, Regina v Chaudary CACD 22-Nov-2002
The defendants applied for the defence statements of co-defendants to be disclosed. A co-defendant was to give evidence for the Crown, and they sought to have it excluded as unreliable.
Held: The 1996 Act created a duty of secondary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.222540

Where a time estimate came to be seen by the advocates as inadequate, they had a duty to inform the court.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ, Bell, Hughes JJ

Citations:

Times 10-Jan-2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.222536

When asked whether the appellate courts in England and Wales should entertain additional evidence under the section, which required the court to be satisfied that there was a reasonable explanation for the failure to adduce it: ‘The court has in general to be satisfied that the evidence could not with reasonable diligence have been obtained for use at the trial.’

Judges:

Sachs LJ

Citations:

(1971) 56 Cr App R 143

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 23((2)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Ramawat Dosoruth v The State of Mauritius The Director of Public Prosecutions PC 21-Oct-2004
PC (Mauritius) The defendant challenged his conviction for having taken a bribe saying there had been an injustice, and seeking protection directly under the constitution. The evidence against him was that a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.220505

The court specifically rejected the argument that the decision of the ECtHR was irrelevant.

Judges:

Lord Justice Hooper

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Crim 2236

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Beckles, Regina v CACD 12-Nov-2004
The appellant had been convicted in 1997 of robbery and false imprisonment. His case was now refererred by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The defendant had, on advice from his solicitor refused to answer questions at the police station. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.220105

It was quite unnecessary for a trial judge faced with issues about the quality or probative value of identification evidence to hold a trial-within-a-trial. The normal procedure was that laid down in Turnbull, where the court ‘made it abundantly clear that, where evidence of identification is such that it would be unsafe for a jury to rely on it, the judge should intervene’. After citing a passage from Turnbull regarding the basis and nature of the court’s intervention, the court icontinued: ‘In the normal way the trial judge will make his assessment whether he needs to take the action referred to by the Lord Chief Justice either at the end of the case for the prosecution or after all the evidence in the case has been called. There may be exceptional cases where the position is so clear on the depositions that he can give a ruling at an earlier stage’.

Citations:

(1986) 86 CAR 33

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Turnbull and Another etc CCA 9-Jun-1976
The defendants appealed against their convictions which had been based upon evidence of visual identification.
Held: Identification evidence can be unreliable, and courts must take steps to reduce injustice. The judge should warn the jury of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Davies v Regina CACD 29-Oct-2004
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He said the identification was partial and weak, being of a partial face and two spoken words. It was objected that his counsel had wrongly failed to object to its admission.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.219070

The defendant, convicted of murder, had died. It later came to light that materials with the prosecution forensic team had not been disclosed by the prosecution.
Held: The Home Secretary could make a reference to the Appeal court despite the death. Such a failure could be a material procedural irregularity. The duty of disclosure on a prosecutor extended also to the prosecutors forensic experts.
A material irregularity which causes a conviction to be quashed is not a mere procedural irregularity and there is no real distinction between a material irregularity which causes a miscarriage of justice and a feature of the trial which causes a conviction to be unsafe: ‘The outcome of the debate as to whether non-disclosure of material is an irregularity within ground (c) or is a feature which can render a conviction unsafe or unsatisfactory under ground (a) has, as it seems to us, no consequence in regard to the result (as opposed to the route) of an appeal. This is because of the proviso. If the court is unable to hold ‘that no miscarriage of justice has actually occurred’ in a case of irregularity then, as in Regina v. Paraskeva, 76 Cr.App.R. 162, the conviction is not ‘safe’. If it does so hold, then the court is effectively saying that the conviction is safe and satisfactory.’

Citations:

[1992] 2 All ER 433, [1992] QB 936, (1992) 94 Cr App Rep 133, [2006] EWCA Crim 1239

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1995 17(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Taylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Wood; Director of Public Prosecutions v McGillicuddy Admn 19-Jan-2006
Each defendant sought disclosure of materials concerning the intoximeter instruments, having been charged with driving with excess alcohol. The defendants said that the meters were inaccurate and that the manufacturers were in effect part of the . .
Cited – Regina v Alibhai and Others CACD 30-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute counterfeit Microsoft products. They said that inadequate disclosure had been provided by Microsoft. The principal witness was a participating informant . .
Cited – H, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL 28-Feb-2007
The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
Held: The practice . .
Cited – Okedare, Regina v CACD 27-Feb-2014
The court heard applications for leave to appeal on behalf of applicants who had either absconded or disappeared.
Held: The court considered whether the lawyers filing the appeals had authority, whether express or implied. ‘we are satisfied . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.211386

When an application is made to have evidence admitted under the 1988 Act, the evidence in support of that application must be given under oath.

Citations:

[1995] Crim LR 810

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 23(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lobban, Regina v CACD 7-May-2004
The defendant appealed his conviction. A witness statement had been read, but he had wanted to cross examine her. The court was satisfied that her refusal to give evidence in person was through fear.
Held: In making the decision, the judge had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.199782

The defendant appealed saying that a DNA profile found at the scene of the crime which did not match the accused was wrongly described by the judge to the jury.
Held: The presence of the additional DNA profile was in the circumstances powerful evidence to support the defence case and should have been left with the jury to assess. The judge had directed that it neither lent support to nor detracted from either case. The judge had allowed himself to be affected by a purely theooretical and speculative possibility raised by the prosecution expert.

Judges:

Rix LJ, Forbes, Barker QC JJ

Citations:

Times 08-Jul-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.199244

The defendant, accused of a sexual offence, wished to assert in his defence that the complainant had pestered him for sex, and to question her on this. The judge had not allowed the questions to be put, being questions about her previous sexual behaviour.
Held: Where the purpose of the questioning was to undermine the complainant’s credibility, cross examination should be refused. Where the purpose was to strengthen the defence case, then the judge had then to ask whether a refusal to allow the questioning would render the trial unfair. In this case the defendant had chosen in any event not to give evidence, and the judge would properly have directed the jury to disregard answers to the questions if put. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Crane, Hunt JJ

Citations:

Times 08-Jun-2004

Statutes:

Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.199550

In the course of a trial, both counsel had seen the judge in chambers, as a result of which defence counsel told his client that the judge had indicated that a suspended sentence would be the outcome if there was a change of plea to guilty. The defendant then changed his plea, but was subsequently sentenced to immediate custody. On the appeal, counsel’s memory of the conversation differed from that of the judge.
Held: It was not possible for the appeal court to resolve such differences. It had been said before that such conversations whilst a necessary incident of a trial, must be held in the presence of a shorthand note taker, and: ‘If nothing else, this appeal demonstrates yet again the problem inherent in out-of-court discussions between counsel and the trial judge in criminal cases. Of course, on the authority of the well known case of Reg. v. Turner (1970) 54 Cr.App.R. 352, in some circumstances it is permissible for counsel to see the judge in his room to ascertain his reaction to possible sentencing options open to him. But that should never occur, as has been said on almost innumerable occasions in this court, in the absence of a shorthand notetaker or, alternatively, in the absence of some recording device. In this case there was neither a shorthand writer present nor a recording device. What has happened here is something that from time to time does happen, namely there has arisen a dispute (not to put too fine a point on it) between the judge’s account of what was said and the account that has been produced for perusal by this court in the form of affidavit evidence from both defending and prosecuting counsel. The dispute comes before this court when it is ill-equipped to resolve conflicts of recollection between counsel and the judge, and where in seeking to do justice, this court runs the real risk of not achieving it. Instead, a thoroughly unsatisfactory state of affairs is created where either the defendant has a genuine sense of grievance or the prosecution has not properly ventilated its case, or both disquieting consequences ensue.
We find it disturbing that despite frequent observations made in this court discouraging unnecessary visits to the judge’s room, they appear to continue up and down the country.’
The Court accepted that the defendant had been misled by his own counsel into believing that the judge had given some sort of undertaking that he would pass a suspended sentence when, according to the judge, no such undertaking had been given. The court quashed the sentences and substituted suspended ones.

Citations:

[1990] 1 WLR 1311

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Turner CACD 1970
The court considered an appeal where the defendant had entered a plea of guilty but had felt himself under undue pressure from the judge.
Held: The court urged caution in the practice of counsel seeing the judge in his chambers, though . .

Cited by:

Cited – Lobban, Regina v CACD 7-May-2004
The defendant appealed his conviction. A witness statement had been read, but he had wanted to cross examine her. The court was satisfied that her refusal to give evidence in person was through fear.
Held: In making the decision, the judge had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.199779

Evidence in support of an application for a witness’ statement which was to be read out, should be supported by oral evidence, though that may properly be given by a police officer.

Citations:

(1991) 92 Cr App R 98

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 23(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lobban, Regina v CACD 7-May-2004
The defendant appealed his conviction. A witness statement had been read, but he had wanted to cross examine her. The court was satisfied that her refusal to give evidence in person was through fear.
Held: In making the decision, the judge had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.199781

The defendant appeal against a conviction for cheating the revenue after the use of evidence obtained against him by compulsion in investigations under the Insolvency Act.
Held: The information obtained in an investigation would normally be considered confidential, but had been used to obtain warrants and to lay informations: ‘It is self-evidently in the public interest that the appropriate prosecuting authority should have such material to aid its investigation which might well be considerably hampered by any requirements to obtain court approval or to give notice to the person who had provided the material.’
Information obtained by the use of compulsory means is confidential in the sense that it may only be used for the purposes for which it was obtained. By the time of the trial, the use of such material would be unlawful and they were not admitted. The judge refused a stay on the basis that the prosecution remained an abuse of process. Disclosure by the investigators to other authorities was permitted without notifying the defendant and without his consent or the consent of another court. There was ample additional evidence to support the conviction, and the appeal was refused.

Judges:

Tuckey LJ, Douglas Brown, Hedley JJ

Citations:

Times 09-Jul-2004, [2004] 3 All E R 520, [2004] 1 WLR 3240, [2005] 1 All ER (Comm) 328, [2004] All ER (D) 234, [2005] 1 Lloyds Rep 383

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 132 235

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.198722

The court discussed the intended meaning of ‘unduly lenient’: ‘[T]here is a line to be drawn . . between the leniency of a sentence in any given case and a sentence which is ‘unduly’ lenient . . The purpose of the system of Attorney-General’s References in particular cases seems to us to be the avoidance of gross error, the allaying of widespread concern at what may appear to be an unduly lenient sentence, and the preservation of public confidence in cases where a judge appears to have departed by a substantial extent from the norms of sentencing generally applied by the court in cases of a particular type.’

Judges:

Potter LJ

Citations:

[2003] 1 Cr App Rep (S) 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Council for the Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v General Medical Council and Dr Solanke Admn 30-Apr-2004
The council appealed against what it said was a lenient sentence imposed on a doctor for malpractice.
Held: It was relevant to take account of the way criminal courts dealt with appeals against lenient sentences. The test in relation to an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.196596

In the course of the defendant’s trial issues of identification arose. The defendant appealed.
Held: The judge failed to draw to the attention of the jury any specific weaknesses in the identification evidence as required in Turnbull. It was a specific requirement in even the shortest trial where an issue as to identification arose. The judge would have done better to discuss the matter with counsel when no doubt he would have been reminded of his obligation.

Judges:

Hedley J

Citations:

Times 28-Apr-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Regina v Turnbull and Another etc CCA 9-Jun-1976
The defendants appealed against their convictions which had been based upon evidence of visual identification.
Held: Identification evidence can be unreliable, and courts must take steps to reduce injustice. The judge should warn the jury of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.196717

The court considered an appeal where the defendant had entered a plea of guilty but had felt himself under undue pressure from the judge.
Held: The court urged caution in the practice of counsel seeing the judge in his chambers, though accepted that there must be freedom of access between counsel and the judge when there are matters calling for communications or discussions of such a nature that counsel cannot in the interests of his client mention them in open court.
Lord Parker CJ said: ‘once [the defendant] felt that this was an intimation emanating from the judge, it is really idle in the opinion of this court to think that he really had a free choice in the matter.’ An accused, having considered counsel’s advice, must have complete freedom of choice whether to plead guilty or not guilty.

Judges:

Lord Parker CJ

Citations:

[1970] 2 QB 321, [1970] 2 All ER 281, [1970] 54 Cr App R 352

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Mullen, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant had been imprisoned, but his conviction was later overturned. He had been a victim of a gross abuse of executive power. The British authorities had acted in breach of international law and had been guilty of ‘a blatant and extremely . .
Applied – Regina v Smith, Beaney CACD 18-Mar-1999
The defendants appealed their convictions, saying that the guilty pleas had been obtained by pressure. On the day of the trial, there had been conversations between their representatives, in the course of which inconsistent admissions were made. . .
Cited – Regina v Smith CACD 1990
In the course of a trial, both counsel had seen the judge in chambers, as a result of which defence counsel told his client that the judge had indicated that a suspended sentence would be the outcome if there was a change of plea to guilty. The . .
Cited – Regina v Harper-Taylor and Bakker CA 19-Feb-1988
There had been a prolonged discussion, ranging over a wide field in the judge’s room: ‘Since we regard the discussion in the judge’s room as the source of all the subsequent entanglements, some general observations on the practice of meeting the . .
Cited – Regina v Mason CACD 18-Nov-2004
The defendant had entered a plea of guilty to a charge of manslaughter, but now sought to vacate that plea. There had been a fight after a wedding reception. The defendant was said to have joined in a multi-handed attack on the victim. The defendant . .
Updated – Goodyear, Karl, Regina v CACD 19-Apr-2005
The defendant complained that he had pleaded guilty to a charge of corruption on the basis of an indication from the judge that he would not receive a custodial sentence. Having pleaded guilty he had then been sentenced to a six months prison . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) (Rogan) CANI 2001
The court discussed the need to take notes of meetings in chambers between the judge and counsel. The court set out four principles to be applied: ‘1. There should be freedom of access for counsel to judges, but that does not mean freedom to discuss . .
Cited – Rooney and Others, Re Attorney General’s Reference (Number 1 of 2005) CANI 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted or armed robbery. The Attorney General appealed against the sentences saying they were too lenient. Rooney argued that his plea of guilty had been after an indication by the judge and the reference was misguided. . .
Cited – Regina v Mitchell CACD 25-Apr-1996
The defendant appealed against his sentence for three counts of indecent assault on children. The pre-sentence report had recommended him for teatment on a residential programme but recocgnised that he was a threat to young girls. He complained that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.196535

Inconsistent verdicts

Citations:

[1998] Crim LR 483

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Rafferty (WA); Regina v Rafferty (WK) CACD 5-Apr-2004
The defendants appealed, saying the jury verdicts were not consistent.
Held: Counsel presenting such an appeal should ensure that the transcripts of the cases now cited were put before the court. To have a verdict set aside for inconsistency . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.196066

The prosecutor had closed his case, and the defendant had presented some evidence. It became clear that the prosecutor had failed to present evidence on one element, and the defendant appealed his conviction after the prosecutor had been allowed to re-open his case to present that evidence.
Held: It was too wide a statement to say that the only material consideration was whether the interests of justice would be best served by allowing the witness to be called. The court had always to bear in mind the principle that the prosecution case should be brought to an end before the defence was called on to meet that case. ‘Almost any additional relevant evidence will be of value to a jury, and if the only question one had to ask oneself was: was justice more likely to be done if the jury heard this evidence, the result may well be almost any fact arising late in a trial would be let in by an ever-widening door. It is clear that that is not the practice in our courts. The rule that the prosecution must finish their case once and for all before the defence starts is a very important and salutary one.’ However: ‘On these very special facts, it seems to us that the exercise of the Judge’s discretion did not step outside the narrow limits of the discretion which a judge can exercise in allowing the prosecution to call further evidence. There was no prejudice to the appellant in this case. If there had been even a possibility of prejudice to the appellant, the court would have taken the view that the judge’s exercise of discretion was wrong.’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

[1974] 60 Crim App R 1

Cited by:

Cited – Christopher James Jolly v Director of Public Prosections Admn 31-Mar-2000
At trial in the magistrates court, the prosecution had failed to bring evidence that the computer used to analyse the defendant’s breath alcohol was in proper working condition. The defendant submitted no case to answer, and the magistrates allowed . .
Cited – Regina v Sheppard HL 1993
Where the prosecutor wishes to rely on evidence set out in a document produced by a computer, there must be affirmative evidence as to the computer’s reliability in accordance with the requirements of Section 69. It can be either oral evidence or a . .
Cited – James v South Glamorgan County Council 1992
On trial of a charge of supplying a motor vehicle in an un-roadworthy condition, a prosecution witness (the person to whom the vehicle was supplied) had difficulty in locating the Court House. Before he arrived, the prosecution had closed its case, . .
Cited – Tuck v Vehicle Inspectorate Admn 24-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed a conviction for exceeding the gross permitted weight on a goods vehicle. The magistrates having heard the case, the defendant submitted there was no case to answer, the prosecution having failed to bring evidence as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.195671

In a difficult case, the judge asked for the assistance of counsel in the absence of the jury, but declined assistance in connection with his proposed Turnbull direction. That direction was then said to be defective.
Held: A wise judge makes it clear that he welcomes assistance from counsel, and it was counsel’s duty to give assistance.

Judges:

Woolf LCJ, Richards, Henriques JJ

Citations:

Times 27-Feb-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Turnbull and Another etc CCA 9-Jun-1976
The defendants appealed against their convictions which had been based upon evidence of visual identification.
Held: Identification evidence can be unreliable, and courts must take steps to reduce injustice. The judge should warn the jury of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.194820

For an appeal to succeed in respect of a trial judge’s exercise of discretion to refuse a change of plea from Guilty to Not Guilty: ‘It must be shown that the judge misdirected himself or took account of matters which he should not have taken account of or failed to take account of matters to which he should have had regard or that he exercised his discretion in a wholly unreasonable manner.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Butterfield Lord Justice Mantell

Citations:

[2004] EWCA (Crim) 492

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Mason CACD 18-Nov-2004
The defendant had entered a plea of guilty to a charge of manslaughter, but now sought to vacate that plea. There had been a fight after a wedding reception. The defendant was said to have joined in a multi-handed attack on the victim. The defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.194329

The defendant was arrested at home on suspicion of one charge, but the police then asked questions about his clothing. He appealed saying the replies should not have been included.
Held: The questions were intended to secure admissions, and should only have been asked at the police station, but no miscarriage of justice had occurred.

Citations:

(1993) 96 Cr App R 464

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78, Criminal Appeal Act 1968 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Considered – Regina v Absolam CACD 1990
A was arrested. He was already on bail for possession of cannabis, and in the hope finding further evidence he was asked to empty his pockets, ‘and put the drugs on the table’ he did so and admitted selling drugs.
Held: The procedure should . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Dianne Senior and Samantha Senior CA 4-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed convictions for being involved in the illegal importation of cocaine, saying that questioning at the airport before a caution was administered was unlawful. By the time they were asked about the cases, the customs officers . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.194890

The defendant appealed his sentence.
Held: The judge had imposed an extended licence period without this being discussed first with counsel so as to allow representations to be made. This was wrong, but such an order would not always be quashed on this sole ground.

Judges:

Woolf LJC, Judge LJ, Rafferty J

Citations:

Times 22-Mar-2004

Statutes:

Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 85

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.194825

Where a defendant has not given evidence the whole of a ‘mixed’ statement, one which includes matter which is incriminating and also matter which is exculpatory, should be admitted in evidence, if it is to be admitted at all. Nevertheless, the court discussed the dangers of admitting, in drugs cases, entire statements of defendants which avoided the defendant giving evidence on oath and being cross-examined: ‘Where a ‘mixed’ statement is under consideration by the jury in a case where the defendant has not given evidence, it seems to us that the simplest, and, therefore, the method most likely to produce a just result, is for the jury to be told that the whole statement, both the incriminating parts and the excuses or explanations, must be considered by them in deciding where the truth lies. It is, to say the least, not helpful to try to explain to the jury that the exculpatory parts of the statement are something less than evidence of the facts they state. Equally, where appropriate, as it usually will be, the judge may, and should, point out that the incriminating parts are likely to be true (otherwise why say them?), whereas the excuses do not have the same weight. Nor is there any reason why, again where appropriate, the judge should not comment in relation to the exculpatory remarks upon the election of the accused not to give evidence.’

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

(1981) 73 Cr App R 359

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Regina v Sharp (Colin) HL 1988
The defendant had been seen fleeing the area of a crime. Some days later he volunteered a statement admitting his presence in the area, but providing an innocent explanation. He did not give evidence at trial. His statement was put in by the . .
Cited – Regina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
Cited – Ian Cauldero and Nigill Francois v The State PC 28-Sep-1999
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendants appealed their convictions for murder. They complained at to the judge’s direction as to a statement and as to intent, where they had said that the gun had been wrestled . .
Cited – Alexander Von Starck v The Queen PC 28-Feb-2000
(Jamaica) The defendant had fatally stabbed a woman. On arrest, he admitted killing her and that he had the knife which he had used to do so. He gave the police officer a pouch containing a knife, on which blood of the same group as that of the . .
Cited – Onasanya v London Borough of Newham Admn 14-Jul-2006
The defendant had tried to sell his car by placing a notice in a rear window saying it was for sale, and leaving it on the street.
Held: The authority said that there was more than one purpose in the vehicle being left on the street, and that . .
Cited – Shirley, Regina v CACD 8-Nov-2013
The defendant had been convicted of several very serious sexual and physical assaults and rapes. He appealed against his conviction, saying that the judge had not fairly represented his defence to the jury. He said that the complainant had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.194986

The defendant appealed his conviction. At trial he had had the assistance of an interpreter.
Held: Whoever signs the leave to application for leave to appeal must indicate in every case where an interpreter had been used. The failure to do so had caused an unnecesary adjournment.

Judges:

Judge LJ

Citations:

Times 18-Feb-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.193776

On a charge of burglary, the prosecution had not brought evidence that the appellant was one of those who carried cartons out of Liberty’s department store. The court allowed the prosecutor to re-open his case to present that evidence.
Held: ‘Quite clearly there is nothing in these decisions to sustain the argument for the appellant that the law admits of only two situations in which further evidence may be called, and that the Court in Francis ( supra) was wrong to open up a more general discretion in its proposition (7). Quite the reverse. They demonstrate, as would be expected, that the judge must be left with some degree of freedom to meet the various and unpredictable problems which may arise during a trial. Our only hesitation is whether the extra cases might perhaps have led the court to state its seventh proposition in rather less restrictive terms. On balance we think not, although it might perhaps be expanded by the addition, after the concluding words, of ‘..especially when the evidence is tendered after the case for the defendant has begun’.’ and ‘These are important considerations which the judge must always bear in mind, but they are not necessarily conclusive. Tactics are a legitimate part of the adversarial process, but justice is what matters: justice to the public, represented by the prosecution, as well as to the defendant. Undeniably, if he had declined to admit the evidence he could not have been criticised. The question is whether by letting it in he stepped outside the reasonable bounds of the discretion and thereby created a real risk of injustice.’

Judges:

Mustill LJ

Citations:

[1992] 94 Cr App R 164

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Francis CACD 1990
The prosecution had omitted to bring evidence that the person standing at No.20 on an identification parade was the appellant. The defence complained that the prosecutor had been allowed to re-open his case.
Held: ‘The discretion of the judge . .

Cited by:

Cited – Yearly v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 21-Mar-1997
Having closed their case, the prosecution applied for and were granted opportunity to adduce evidence in the form of certificates under section 69.
Held: The court had a discretion to allow further evidence. The magistrates had correctly . .
Cited – Christopher James Jolly v Director of Public Prosections Admn 31-Mar-2000
At trial in the magistrates court, the prosecution had failed to bring evidence that the computer used to analyse the defendant’s breath alcohol was in proper working condition. The defendant submitted no case to answer, and the magistrates allowed . .
Cited – Tuck v Vehicle Inspectorate Admn 24-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed a conviction for exceeding the gross permitted weight on a goods vehicle. The magistrates having heard the case, the defendant submitted there was no case to answer, the prosecution having failed to bring evidence as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.193590

Citations:

[2002] 1 WLR 2870

Links:

CS

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Amended – Practice Direction (Bail: Failure to surrender and trials in absence) CACD 22-Jan-2004
The court, amending the earlier direction, gave detailed guidance on how prosecutors and courts should deal with trials where defendants had failed to surrender to bail. Defendants must be made aware of the damage caused by failures to surrender. . .
Amended – Practice Direction (Crown court: Guidance to Jurors) CACD 23-Feb-2004
Where jurors had concerns about the behaviour of fellow jurors, they should bring these to the attention of the judge during the trial rather than after. Jurors should be told of this, but not in such a way as to encourage inappropriate criticism of . .
Cited – Practice Direction (Court of Appeal, Criminal Division: Listing) 8-Mar-2004
Counsel must give priority to a listing in the Court of Appeal over a commitment in a lower court. . .
Cited – Lobban, Regina v CACD 7-May-2004
The defendant appealed his conviction. A witness statement had been read, but he had wanted to cross examine her. The court was satisfied that her refusal to give evidence in person was through fear.
Held: In making the decision, the judge had . .
Amended – Practice Direction (Jury Service: Excusal) SC 22-Mar-2005
In view of the new categories of people may be called to jury service, the court gave amended guidelines on principles allowing excusal. The new categories might have greater responsibilities by way of public service commitments. Applications for . .
Cited – Practice Direction (Crime: Forms for use in criminal proceedings) SC 22-Mar-2005
A new schedule of forms to be used in all criminal cases after April 5 when the new rules come in was provided. Most forms remained unaltered, and where unaltered, existing forms could continue to be used. . .
Cited – Goodyear, Karl, Regina v CACD 19-Apr-2005
The defendant complained that he had pleaded guilty to a charge of corruption on the basis of an indication from the judge that he would not receive a custodial sentence. Having pleaded guilty he had then been sentenced to a six months prison . .
Cited – Regina v Kuimba CACD 12-Apr-2005
In dismissing the defendant’s appeal, the court expressed the view that the Appeal court should be more ready to use the powers given to deter hopeless appeals by ordering that while such applications were being processed, time spent in custody . .
Amended – Practice Direction (Criminal proceedings: Classification and allocation of busienss) SC 26-May-2005
A detailed Practice Direction was handed down as to the classification of offences to be used in deciding how criminal cases were to be allocated on committal to the Crown Court. . .
Cited – Kumar Ali v The State (Appeal 56 of 2004) and Leslie Tiwari v The State PC 2-Nov-2005
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The Board was asked to determine the date from which an unsuccessful appellant’s sentence should run. Pending an appeal or whilst on remand, a prisoner would be held in less demanding . .
Cited – Erskine, Regina v; Regina v Williams CACD 14-Jul-2009
The defendants had been separately convicted of murder several years ago. They sought the quashing of the convictions and substitution of convictions for manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.
Held: The appeal of Erskine . .
Cited – Regina v Dougall CACD 13-May-2010
The defendant had pleaded guilty to conspiracy to corrupt in having provided inducements for the award of medical supplies contracts to Greece. He appealed against a sentence of twelve months imprisonment, saying that it should have been suspended . .
Cited – Robinson, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 19-May-2010
The appellant had been released on licence during his sentence but then recalled. He contended that the effect of the newly introduced section 50A was a retrospective increase in his sentencce. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.193779

A material irregularity had occurred because the prosecution had failed to disclose to the defence that they were in possession of a statement signed by a defence witness as to alibi which was used to cross-examine her when she gave evidence.
Held: ‘We regard this as absurd. There will of course be occasions when such investigations will reveal positive information assisting the defence case. Such material will be disclosed in accordance with current principles. Similarly, the results may provide positive evidence to support the prosecution case, and enable the prosecution to serve notice of further evidence and rely upon it as part of the prosecution case. ‘Where, however, as here, the result of checking the alibi notice is to provide the prosecution with material which serves to undermine the credibility of a witness, apparently to be relied upon by the defence, there is in our judgment no duty of disclosure.’

Judges:

Judge J

Citations:

Unreported, 19 December 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – Regina v Brown (Winston) HL 20-Feb-1997
The victim had been stabbed outside a nightclub. Two witnesses identified the defendant. The defendants complained that evidence had not been disclosed to them.
Held: There is no duty at common law on the prosecution to warn the defence of . .
Cited – Regina v Mills, Regina v Poole HL 24-Jul-1997
The prosecution have a duty to disclose to the defence the statement of an adverse witness and not just to provide the name and address, even though that person was not seen as credible witness by the prosecution. ‘the rule in Bryant and Dickson is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.193836