Police officers were prosecuted following the release of those convicted of the Birmingham bombing and Garland J granted a stay of the criminal proceedings against those officers, pointing out that publicity, although a powerful factor, did not stand alone. The judge said that prejudice engendered by publicity is usually local and temporary, but if the impossibility of having a fair trial becomes national and continuing then there is ‘quite literally, nowhere to go’.

Judges:

Garland J

Citations:

Unreported, 15 October 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Stone CACD 14-Feb-2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction in 1998 of murder based on a confession said to have been made to a fellow prisoner on remand. A witness supporting that confession said after the trial that he had lied under police pressure. The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.441580

The defendant faced committal proceedings for an alleged sexual assault on a young girl. He told the prosecutor of his wish to cross-examine her. The prosecution refused to subject her to the experience of giving evidence at the preliminary hearing as well as at the trial if, as was anticipated, the defendant was to be committed, and called other supporting evidence instead. The defendant appealed against his committal.
Held: The appeal failed. Widgery LCJ said: ‘The question which is posed for us, and the only question on which leave to move was given, is simply this: When committal proceedings are being undertaken in a case such as this, is it open to the prosecution, if they wish, to support the application for committal by calling other supporting evidence and not calling the child at all? That was a course very much in the mind of counsel for the prosecution in this case, because there was other supporting evidence, and he was of the opinion that it would be possible to show a prima facie case and have the applicant committed without the necessity for calling the girl, the complainant, herself. For the purposes of this judgment I would assume that he decided so to do contrary to the request of the defence, who wanted the girl called.
Thus stated, this as a point is a very short one: What is the function of the committal proceedings for this purpose? It is, as the prosecution might contend, simply a safeguard for the citizen to ensure that he cannot be made to stand his trial without a prima facie case being shown; or defence may try out their cross-examination on the prosecution witnesses with a view to using the results to advantage in the Crown Court at a later stage? . . For my part I think it is clear that the function of committal proceedings is to ensure that no one shall stand his trial unless a prima facie case has been made out’.

Judges:

Widgery LCJ

Citations:

[1973] QB 433

Cited by:

Cited – Neill v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 2-Dec-1996
Appeal against wasted costs order made against solicitor. He had information suggesting that an essential prosecution witness might not appear, but she did.
Held: The solicitor had acted correctly: ‘The function of committal is to see if there . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.424200

The court considered what might be oppressive behaviour by an investigating officer.
Held: ‘oppression’ must be given its ordinary dictionary meaning of ‘the exercise of power or authority in a burdensome, harsh, or wrongful manner, the unjust or cruel treatment of subjects, inferiors etc. or the imposition of unreasonable or unjust burdens. ‘Oppression’ in the sub-section would be almost bound to entail some impropriety on the part of the interrogator. The ambit of section 76(2)(b) is wider than that in section 76(2)(a), so that a confession could be invalidated under that paragraph even when there had been no impropriety under the latter provision.

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

[1987] 1 QB 426

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76(2)

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Dhorajiwala CACD 9-Jun-2010
The defendant appealed against her conviction for theft. She had been accused of stealing money over many months from the till at the pharmacy where she worked. She said that a confession in interviews conducted by civilian investigators should not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.416721

The A-G sought leave to refer as unduly lenient a sentence imposed on the defendant. The judge had written down his reasons but had not read them out in court.
Held: The defendant was of low IQ and with other mental health problems. The judge had given reasons but then provided detailed reasons only in writing later. This was for a good reason in trying to assist the defendant understand what was happening, but was nevertheless wrong. It was important that the parties and the public should now just how the judge had come to his sentencing decision. He should read his reasons out in open court.

Judges:

Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Simon and Mr Justice Royce

Links:

Times

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 36

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.408563

Raymond on 4 Inst. and Ed. 4. prayed the mandamus, albeit a criminal cause might be adjorn’d into the Exchequer-Chamber, the Court being divided, which the Court granted.

Citations:

[1685] EngR 950, (1685) 2 Keb 259, (1685) 84 ER 160 (C)

Links:

Commonlii

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.397725

Lisle being indicted of murder, was convicted of manslaughter, and prayed his clergy by a friend, not being in Court himself; and after at the same assizes, an appeal waa lodged by the brother and heir of the party slain, and the conviction and appeal were removed by certiorari, and the party by habeas corpus ; and at the return of the certiorari it was moved by the appellant, that he might file a letter of attorney, in which case the Court would not make any rule, but said that they might file it at their peril, yet insinuated that they could not file a letter of attorney by the Stat of Hen. 7, till after appearance ; and they admitted clearly that in mayhem, they could not make an attorney; and the Court said, that if he filed a letter of attorney, and the law required an appearance in person, the appeal would be discontinued ; and Holt Chief Justice said, the appellee ought, after the appeal returned upon the certiorari, to sue a scire facias against the appellant ad prosequendum, for the appellant has not a day in Court; and the Chief Justice enclined fortiter that the Court ought not to refuse to allow clergy to one convict of manslaughter ; but in regard of some resolutions contra, it is fit to be argued; and he said that he had argued it both ways, but he never was satisfied in his judgment with the resolutions which had been given, that they may respite clergy, for by this means they put it in the power of Judges to hang a man ; and at the return of the conviction the counsel of the appellant took exception to the conviction, the which Holt Chief Justice would not allow, and said, that they are strangers to this record, and they have not any privity or authority to take exceptions.

Judges:

Holt CJ

Citations:

[1728] EngR 69, (1728) Skin 670, (1728) 90 ER 300 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.388402

(Central Criminal Court ) The CPS was ordered to disclose unused witness statements and exhibits from the original investigation on the application of a private prosecutor once a prosecution had commenced.

Judges:

Judge Gower

Citations:

[1989] Crim LR 152

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Scopelight Ltd and Others v Chief of Police for Northumbria CA 5-Nov-2009
The claimant sought return of items removed by the defendants under the 1984 Act. A decision had been made against a prosecution by the police. The police wished to hold onto the items to allow a decision from the second defendant.
Held: The . .
Cited – Virgin Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Zinga CACD 24-Jan-2014
Zinga had been convicted of conspiracy to defraud in a private prosecution brought by Virgin Media. After dismissal of the appeal against conviction, Virgin pursued confiscation proceedings. Zinga appealed against refusal of its argument that it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.377733

Where the assizes are adjourned, non venue of the Justices at the day, puts the parol without day. But a re-attachment and a resummons, or habeas corpora jurat tested on that day may be awarded to the next assizes

Citations:

[1794] EngR 836, (1794) 2 Dy 226, (1794) 73 ER 500

Links:

Commonlii

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.369768

Citations:

[1796] EngR 1732, (1796) 11 Mod 234, (1796) 88 ER 1010 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.351437

Indictment for exercising a trade contrary to 5 Eliz. c. 4, may be found at a city or a borough sessions.

Citations:

[1757] EngR 28, (1757) 1 Burr 251, (1757) 97 ER 299

Links:

Commonlii

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.342174

Bias is an exception to the rule against collateral attack on credit

Citations:

[1847] EngR 616, (1847) 1 Exch 91, (1847) 154 ER 38

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Livingstone CANI 25-Jun-2013
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that police officers had fabricated a confession, and had severely mistreated another detainee to concoct further evidence.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Had the material . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.301232

Citations:

[1865] EngR 70, (1865) 4 F and F 515, (1865) 176 ER 670

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.280982

Effect of procedural irregularity such as to require a venire de novo.

Citations:

[1996] 1 Cr App R 286

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Norman, Regina v CACD 31-Jul-2008
The defendant suffered a degenerative disease affecting his mental capacity, and at trial the issue of his fitness to plead arose.
Held: Where the issue of unfitness arose it was necessary for the court to exercise very careful case management . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.279809

The court gave guidance on the procedure where a defendant had been given an indication of sentence before plea but that indication was challenged by the pre-sentence report.

Citations:

(1996) CLR 64, (1996) 1 Cr App R (S) 393

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.272863

The House is not bound on an appeal brought pursuant to a certificate granted under section 1(6) of the 1907 Act to limit the appeal to the certified point. Lord Atkin discussed the 1907 Act: ‘I mention the section in order to support the view that whatever be the point of law upon which the Attorney-General grants his certificate, once it is granted there is ‘a further appeal’ to this House upon all the grounds open to the Court below. The appeal is not limited to the point of law of exceptional public importance, which indeed is not specified in the certificate. The result is that this House is armed with all the powers of the Court of Criminal Appeal in like cases, and amongst other matters may act upon the proviso to section 4(1), if it were to consider that, though the point of law was wrongly decided, no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred.’

Judges:

Lord Atkin

Citations:

[1940] AC 1

Statutes:

Court of Appeal Act 1907 4(10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney-General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher HL 1961
The defendant appealed against his conviction for the murder of his wife. The court allowed his appeal on the ground of a misdirection. The prosecutor having now appealed, he sought to plead insanity.
Held: The appeal was allowed on the new . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.272900

Citations:

[1992] 3 All ER 440

Cited by:

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 . .
See Also – Regina v Clowes (No 2) 1994
The court considered appeals from from criminal convictions including theft in the course of which it was necessary to consider whether the defendants were trustees of monies passed to their company for the purpose of investment in a particular . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.252542

The court found that there was one preparatory hearing in existence, and that that had been conducted before Judge Anwyl-Davies QC. But the trial was listed for hearing before Judge Mota Singh QC, simply because of a direction by the presiding judge that Judge Anwyl-Davies should conduct the re-trial of another case.
Held: In a criminal trial there is no power to change the judge once the jury is sworn until the moment at which the jury returns to give its verdict (though another judge may take that verdict). They then applied that same principle by way of analogy to an unsevered trial of serious fraud. The judge who conducts the preparatory hearing must conduct the trial, save in exceptional circumstances: ‘Does the same principle apply to the trial of serious and complex fraud? Must the same judge hear the preparatory hearing and the process before the jury? The advantages of having the same judge throughout the trial of complex and serious fraud cases is set out in paragraph 6.31 of the Fraud Trials Committee Report (1986 HMSO) chaired by Lord Roskill. It is there stated at page 88: `Almost all the witnesses who discussed this agreed in their evidence that in principle the same judge should conduct the preparatory hearing and the trial itself.’ The 34th recommendation of that Committee reads (page 182): `The judge presiding at the preparatory hearings must be the judge who, save in exceptional circumstances, is to conduct the trial.’ In our judgment the correct principle is that stated in the 34th conclusion of the Committee, namely that the judge presiding at the preparatory hearings must be the judge who, save in exceptional circumstances, is to conduct the trial. Administrative convenience would not be a sufficient reason for changing the judge in a complex and serious fraud case between the preparatory hearings and the proceedings in front of the jury. What amounts to exceptional circumstances will have to be resolved in a case-by-case basis. Clearly the death or serious illness of the judge would qualify as an exceptional circumstance.’ The situation is different as between civil and criminal cases.

Citations:

[1993] 1 WLR 764

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 – In re Kanaris (application for a writ of Habeas Corpus) HL 30-Jan-2003
The defendant faced charges with others on the same indictment. The judge called a preparatory hearing under the 1996 Act, against the others, but held a separate hearing for the defendant, at which he held a similar preparatory hearing for him . .
Cited – Andreas Kanaris v Governor of H M P Pentonville Admn 17-Jan-2002
The defendant sought a writ of habeas corpus, asserting that the custody time limits in his matter had expired before his trial began. An application to extend the limits had to be made before the limit, and had to show proper conduct of the case. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.252537

P, a 16 year old boy with learning difficulties faced charges. A psychologist said his IQ was so low (52) that P would not be able to understand or reply rationally to the charges. The justices decided that he was fit to plead; they had formed a view of him from watching him during the proceedings so far, in which he had taken no active part. P sought judicial review.
Held: The procedure adopted was ‘entirely inappropriate’.
Wright J: ‘The procedure for dealing with matters of this kind in the magistrates court is specifically provided for by a combination of s.37(3) of the Mental Health 1983 when read in conjunction with the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 w.11(1). Under the 2000 Act s.11(1), if on the trial at a magistrates court of an offence punishable on summary conviction punishable with imprisonment, the court
(a) is satisfied the accused did the act or made the omission charged, but
(b) is of the opinion that an enquiry ought to be made into his physical or mental condition, before the method of dealing with him is determined, the court shall adjourn the case to enable a medical examination and report to be made, and shall remand him.
Under the Mental Health Act 1983 s.37(3), where a person is charged before a magistrates court with any act or omission as an offence, and the court would have power on convicting him of that offence to make a Hospital Order or Guardianship Order under (1) above, in his case as being a person suffering from mental illness or severe mental impairment, then if the court is satisfied that the accused did the act or made the omission charged, the court may if it thinks fit, make such an order without convicting him.
It will be seen that these two provisions provide a complete statutory framework for a determination by the magistrates’ court of all the issues that arise in cases of defendants who are or may be mentally ill or suffering from severe mental impairment in the context of offences that are triable summarily only. . . . It will be also be noted that the criteria for exercising the powers vested in the magistrates court under section 37(3) are considerably less strict and more flexible than the common law rules governing the issue of fitness to plead in the Crown Court. . . would have thought that the proper course is . . . to remit the matter to the Barking youth court to be reconsidered . . .in accordance with the machinery provided by the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 — that is to say first to determine whether P did the acts alleged against him, and if so, whether the case is one for an order under section 37(2) of the Mental Health Act 1983.’

Judges:

Wright J

Citations:

[2002] EWHA Admin 734

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 37(3), Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000

Cited by:

Cited – Crown Prosecution Service v P; Director of Public Prosecutions v P Admn 27-Apr-2007
The prosecutor appealed a grant of a stay of a prosecution of the 13 year old defendant as an abuse of process. Reports had indicated that he was unfit to plead. The prosecution contended that, if the court thought P ought not to face trial by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.251547

The appellant had been convicted under the 1952 Act of being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent importation of controlled drugs. She was sentenced to imprisonment on her plea. More than three months later, application was made to forfeit the money found on arrest. The court inferred that the whole of the money had been provided to her to assist in the importation, and a forfeiture order was made, expressed to be under section 27 of the Act of 1971 or, alternatively, under section 43 of the Powers of Criminal Courts Act 1973. She appealed the forfeiture saying it was made without jurisdiction since the time limit for variation under section 11(2) of the Courts Act 1971 had expired. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
Held: By virtue of the definition of ‘sentence’ in section 57 of the Courts Act 1971 the word ‘sentence’ in section 11(2) of that Act included a forfeiture order made against the offender; section 11(2) laid down very clearly that any sentence or other order might be varied or rescinded by the Crown Court within 28 days, but that there was no power in the Crown Court to vary or rescind a sentence or any other order after the expiry of that period, and that accordingly, in the circumstances, the appeal must be allowed.

Judges:

Lord Edmund Davies

Citations:

[1980] AC 598, [1979] 2 WLR 876

Statutes:

Customs and Excise Act 1952 304, Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 3(1), Courts Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Reynolds and Others, Regina v CACD 8-Mar-2007
The court considered how it could marry the law against the increase of penaties on appeal with the possible need to correct a judge’s error in sentencing. It summarised the provisions for sentencing for specified offences: ‘[The] regime requires . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.249951

The defendant appealed conviction for the murder of his infant son. Evidence said that he had lost his temper with a fire in the home as it would not light, and had damaged it with a hammer or by kicking it; evidence that he had lost his temper with a shower, smashing the shower head and cracking the bath; that he had thrown a remote control at the television and that he had hit the wing of his car with a hammer. The defendant appealed its admission.
Held: Tuckey LJ: ‘Persuasively though these submissions are put, we do not accept them. We do not doubt the Pettman principle as elaborated in the commentary to which we have referred, but we think it is important to bear in mind the Law Commission’s warning that the label ‘background evidence’ may be a vehicle for smuggling in otherwise inadmissible evidence for less than adequate reasons. Relevance and necessity are the touchstones of the principle. The fact that a man who is not shown to have any tendency to lose his temper and react violently towards human beings becomes frustrated with the violent towards inanimate object is, we think, irrelevant. Those of us who are ham-fisted or over ambitious DIY enthusiasts would be horrified to learn that frustration in this difficult field of endeavour could be used against us. By the same token it was not necessary for the jury to know about this. It was prejudicial and could only have diverted their attention from the very serious issue which they had to try. Nor could it be said that the case was incomplete or incomprehensible without the admission of this evidence. So we conclude that the judge should not have admitted it at the time he did.’

Judges:

Tuckey LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 1859

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Osbourne, Regina v CACD 13-Mar-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder. He complained at the admission of a statement made by the police surgeon who had attended him in the police station as evidence of bad character under the 2003 Act. The statement was as to his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.250007

The defendant had been charged with putting somebody in fear of violence contrary to section 2 of the 1997 Act. The judge found no case to answer on the count but left it on the indictment. The defendant now appealed his conviction on the lesser charge of harassment. The charge under section 2 was not a summary offence which could have been added to the indictment under the 1988 Act.
Held: The appeal failed. The offence was a proper alternative verdict open to the jury.

Judges:

Lady Justice Hallett, Mr Justice Mackay

Citations:

Times 08-Jan-2007

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997 2, Criminal Justice Act 1988 40

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Carson CACD 1990
Where the judge had found there to be no case to answer on a single count of violent disorder, he was entitled to leave the statutory alternative of using threatening behaviour, a summary offence, to the jury, and the not guilty verdict of the jury . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.247883

If magistrates having heard an application for leave to withdraw a plea of guilty conclude that the evidence described by the prosecution are not sufficient to find guilt, they may allow the plea to be withdrawn. Kennedy LJ: ‘Of course the court will be slow to allow such a change of plea unless there is some obvious reason why it is appropriate in the circumstances to allow it.’

Judges:

Kennedy LJ

Citations:

[1997] COD 21 DC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Revitt, Borg and Barnes v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Sep-2006
The defendants appealed against refusal of leave to withdraw their pleas of guilty. They argued that the current practice infringed their human rights.
Held: The magistrates had been correct not to allow the defendants to withdraw their pleas. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.244872

(Southwark Crown Court) The case was a prosecution for serious fraud. In civil proceedings, despite evidence to suggest a powerful case for dishonesty, a High Court judge had concluded that the claimant had failed to establish that the defendant, Baxendale-Walker, was acting dishonestly, or intentionally ‘driving what he knew to be a dishonest transaction’.
Held: There was a concern about the effect of conflicting decisions of the High Court and a crminal court. The prosecution should be stayed on the grounds that it was ‘against the public interest that the criminal case should proceed . . in that the necessary effect of such a proceeding would be to re-litigate the issue with a view to achieving a result on the facts inconsistent with the findings of fact already made in a final judgment of the High Court’.

Judges:

Judge Wadsworth QC

Citations:

Unreported, 27 June 2002

Citing:

Applied – Smith v Linskills CA 1996
The claimant, a convicted burglar took proceedings against his former solicitors. He alleged that the negligence of the solicitor caused his wrongful conviction.
Held: The case was dismissed. The claimant was seeking to re-litigate issues . .

Cited by:

Cited – Levey, Regina v CACD 27-Jul-2006
The defendant appealed against his conviction of manslaughter of his baby son. He said that a family court had previously investigated the same allegations and had explicitly found itself unable to say which of himself and the mother were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.244669

The court upheld the decision of the Common Sergeant, sitting at the Central Criminal Court, that screens should be erected to enable children who had been treated indecently to give evidence screened from the defendant. The judge was required to see that: ‘the system operates fairly; fairly not only to the defendant, but also to the prosecution and also to the witnesses. Sometimes he has to make decisions as to where the balance of fairness lies. . . We do not need authority to confirm us in the view that what the judge did here in his discretion was a perfectly proper, and indeed a laudable attempt to see that this was a fair trial to all, the defendants, the Crown, and indeed the witnesses.’

Citations:

(1990) 91 CAR 36, (1989) 91 Cr App R 36

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin CACD 19-May-2006
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The . .
Cited – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.242456

The Board looked at the duty if any on a prosecutor to call witnesses: ‘Their Lordships do not desire to lay down any rules to fetter discretion on a matter such as this which is so dependent on the particular circumstances of each case. Still less do they desire to discourage the utmost candour and fairness on the part of those conducting prosecutions; but at the same time they cannot, speaking generally, approve of an idea that a prosecution must call witnesses irrespective of consideration of number and of reliability, or that a prosecution ought to discharge the functions both of prosecution and defence.’

Judges:

Lord Roche

Citations:

[1936] 3 All ER 36

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Oliva CCA 18-May-1965
The defendant appealed his conviction for wounding one Brian Rutledge with intent to do him grievous bodily harm. Both the victim, Mr Rutledge, and also a man named Hampden gave evidence at the committal proceedings and their names appeared on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.242113

It was common ground between the psychiatric experts that, at the time when the applicant killed her husband, her responsibility was materially diminished. The prosecution were prepared to accept a plea of guilty to manslaughter on this ground. The applicant refused to tender such a plea and gave express instructions that she would plead not guilty. After conviction she wished diminished responsibility to be reconsidered.
Held: The court rejected the request by a defendant to bring at appeal from her conviction for murder, new medical evidence as to her diminished responsibilty at the time of the offence.
The applicant was ‘sufficiently capable’ of tendering her plea and fully advised as to her position. ‘Although she may not have been a normal person, she was capable in law of making the decision’.

Citations:

[1995] 1 All ER 187

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Weekes CACD 18-Feb-1999
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder saying that at the time of the offence he suffered a paranoid psychotic illness which would have substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts. He was not regarded as insane as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.241719

The judge withdrew from the jury the central issue whether the appellant was habitually in the company of a prostitute.

Citations:

(1968) Cr App R 47

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 1956 30(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – H, Regina v CACD 25-Apr-2006
The defendant youth appealed his conviction and sentence for rape by oral penetration of a six or seven year old boy. He complained that the evidence contained such inconsistences that the case should not have proceeded. Complaint was also made that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.241328

A motorist successfully challenged his conviction for careless driving because of a failure by the prosecutor, in breach of a duty owed to the court and the defence, to disclose the existence of witnesses who could have given evidence favourable to the defence. Although no dishonesty was suggested, it was this suppressio veri which had the same effect as a suggestio falsi in distorting and vitiating the process leading to conviction, and it was, in my opinion, the analogy which Lord Widgery CJ drew between the case before him and the cases of fraud, collusion and perjury which had been relied on in counsel’s argument, which identified the true principle on which the decision could be justified.

Citations:

[1979] QB 283, [1979] 1 All ER 209

Cited by:

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 . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Corporation v Sugar and Another Admn 27-Apr-2007
The applicant sought publication of a report prepared for the respondent as to the even handedness of its reporting of matters in the middle east. The BBC had refused saying that the release of the report would have direct impact on its ability to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.231074

When a defendant should be allowed to withdraw a plea.

Citations:

[2000] 1 Cr App R (S) 538

Cited by:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Toney Admn 14-Jul-2005
The defendant appealed a refusal to allow him to withdraw a plea of guilty. He was accused of assaulting his wife. He had had legal advice before interview and trial.
Held: Though the defendant had not waived privilege a note had been placed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.230908

The court emphasised the need for specificity in any notice given under section 9 of the 1984 Act.

Citations:

[1987] 84 Cr App R 219

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 9

Cited by:

Cited – Energy Financing Team Ltd and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office, Bow Street Magistrates Court Admn 22-Jul-2005
The claimants sought to set aside warrants and executions under them to provide assistance to a foreign court investigating alleged unlawful assistance to companies in Bosnia Herzegovina.
Held: The issue of such a warrant was a serious step. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.230385

The United States, in connection with the investigation of an alleged fraud, sought the assistance of the Secretary of State to obtain evidence and information from members of an English firm of accountants, who were not themselves under suspicion. The matter was referred to the Director and the solicitors for the accountants sought access to the letter of request. Access was refused, on the basis that it was by treaty a confidential document, but the Director went on to provide detailed information as to the American investigation, based on the letter of request.
Held: Lord Justice Kennedy: ‘Having regard to the treaty obligations it is right to start from the position that the letter of request is not a disclosable document, but justice must be done to those who are the subject of a section 2 notice pursuant to a letter of request and the consequential request from the Secretary of State to the Director of the SFO pursuant to section 4(2A) of the Act. The needs of justice can normally be met, as in this case, if when a request is made for disclosure of the letter of request information is given as to the nature of the criminal investigation, but in some cases the requirements of justice may require more.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy

Citations:

[2002] EWCA 2304 Admin

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Energy Financing Team Ltd and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office, Bow Street Magistrates Court Admn 22-Jul-2005
The claimants sought to set aside warrants and executions under them to provide assistance to a foreign court investigating alleged unlawful assistance to companies in Bosnia Herzegovina.
Held: The issue of such a warrant was a serious step. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.230387

A request for assistance came from the United States pursuant to the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty of 2nd December 1996. Pill LJ, giving the first judgment stressed the need for candour and full disclosure when a warrant is being sought, quoting Bingham LJ in ex parte Hill that the judge ‘should be told anything to the knowledge to the party applying which might weigh against making an order’. Pill LJ was critical of the width and lack of clarity of the particular warrants.

Judges:

Pill LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 7 April 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Lewes Crown Court ex parte Hill 1991
Bingham LJ said: ‘The Police and Criminal Evidence Act governs a field in which there are two very obvious public interests. There is, first of all, a public interest in the effective investigation and prosecution of crime. Secondly, there is a . .

Cited by:

Cited – Energy Financing Team Ltd and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office, Bow Street Magistrates Court Admn 22-Jul-2005
The claimants sought to set aside warrants and executions under them to provide assistance to a foreign court investigating alleged unlawful assistance to companies in Bosnia Herzegovina.
Held: The issue of such a warrant was a serious step. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.230386

The judge was bound to direct the jury that a defendant was fully entitled to sit back and see if the prosecution had proved its case, and that they must not make any assumption of guilt from the fact that he had not gone into the witness box. Diminished responsibility is not an issue to which the credibility of the defendant is in any way relevant.

Citations:

[1968] 2 QB 99

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957 2

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 . .
Cited – Regina v Andrews CACD 15-Oct-2003
The defendant sought leave to appeal her conviction for murder saying that a finding of manslaughter was appropriate for her diminished responsibility.
Held: There was insufficient evidence to establish that the judge’s directions on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.229098

Increase of sentence on appeal.

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

(1981) 73 Cr App R

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Williams v The State PC 15-Mar-2005
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant had been a policeman. He had been sentenced for a brutal rape of a female who had come to the station. His sentence of 25 years was increased at the Court of Appeal to 30 years. He appealed the increase in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.226137

(New Zealand) The court considered the effect of failure of defence counsel on trial. Counsel had elected not to call alibi evidence in the face of his client’s instructions to do so.
Held: ‘The reason, it appears, was that counsel thought the proposed evidence unreliable and that it would be improper for him and detrimental to the applicant for it to be called. It is not for this Court to question counsel’s judgement about that, or to comment upon the evidence ourselves. But the plain unvarnished fact is that counsel most certainly had no right to disregards his [the applicant’s] instructions. Following any advice he thought it proper to give his client, his duty was either to act on the instructions he then received or to withdraw from the case.’

Citations:

[1985] 1 NZLR 106, (1984) 1 CRNZ 215

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Anderson v HM Advocate HCJ 1996
The court considered the effect on a conviction of a failure by defence counsel. After considering the authorities: ‘It can only be said to have resulted in a miscarriage of justice if it has deprived the accused of his right to a fair trial. That . .
Cited – Bally Sheng Balson v The State PC 2-Feb-2005
PC (Dominica) The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his partner and appealed the conviction.
Held: The case did not fall within the case of Anderson, and counsel’s failure was not such as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.226131

The judge has a wide discretion to refuse any application by the advocate depute to cross-examine the appellant on his previous convictions.

Citations:

1988 JC 127

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Devolution) PC 11-May-2005
The defendant appealed his convictions for robbery. He had been subject to a dock identification, and he complained that the prosecution had failed in its duties of disclosure.
Held: The combination of several failings meant that the defendant . .
Cited – O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 SC 13-Jun-2013
The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.225527

The defendant admitted paying two others to burgle his partner’s home, but said he had not anticipated violence, and appealed against his conviction for robbery, saying the judge should have left the alternative verdict to the jury. The jury, during their deliberations, asked whether there was a lesser charge than robbery of which the defendant could be convicted, having burglary in mind. The judge answered, correctly, that burglary was not an alternative and, incorrectly, that there was no available lesser charge: the defendant could in law have been convicted of theft.
Held: The appeal was dismissed.
Mustill LJ said: ‘It was argued on behalf of the Crown that this test was not satisfied in the present case, where there was, it was submitted, ample evidence to justify the conviction of Campbell for murder. It seems to us that the test is material where the possible alternative is a relatively trifling offence, consideration of which would only distract the jury. It is clear from the terms of the passage which we have quoted from Mustill LJ’s judgment in R v Fairbanks that other considerations may require a lesser offence to be left. In the present case it does appear that it was a tenable possibility that the jury might reject the evidence of Dawn Shaw about the conversation in her house, in which event the jury would need direction about the matters requiring proof if Campbell was to be convicted of murder on the basis of having taken part in a joint enterprise. In such event they might have acquitted him of murder, though finding him guilty of assisting the offender.’ A flexible approach is required: ‘[Defence counsel] submitted that it was for the judge to ensure that all material issues were placed before the jury, even if not argued overtly by him in closing. We feel impelled to agree with this submission. For the reasons which we have stated, we are of the opinion that the case does not fall within the category of those in which the issue does not arise in the way in which the case has been presented to the court. It is not one in which Campbell has admitted that the offence was committed. The possibility was there that he took some lesser part in the affair than full complicity in murder, and that possibility was not removed by his denial that he had anything at all to do with the attack. We therefore must conclude that the judge should have left the lesser offence to the jury and given them an appropriate direction on the law relating to join enterprise.’ and ‘To interfere with the verdict would require us to identify solid grounds for suspecting that the members of the jury had foresworn their oaths by deliberately returning a verdict of guilty when they were not sure of it, simply to avoid an unwanted outcome.’

Judges:

Mustill LJ

Citations:

[1988] 1 WLR 1265, [1988] Crim LR 760, (1988) 88 Cr App R 173

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Fairbanks CACD 1986
The defendant complained that the judge had not left an alternate verdict of careless driving to the jury where he had been charged with driving a motor vehicle on the road recklessly.
Held: The conviction was quashed.
Mustill LJ said: . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Maxwell HL 1990
The defendant had hired two men to enter his former partner’s house to commit robbery. It was his defence that he did not contemplate violence, and that he was only guilty of the offence of burglary. The prosecution would not add a count of burglary . .
Cited – Sutton London Borough Council v S and Another QBD 26-Oct-2004
Parents had had charges brought against them by the appellant for failing to ensure the attendance of their child at school dismissed. The authority appealed.
Held: The authority should have considered more carefully whether it was appropriate . .
Cited – Coutts, Regina v CACD 21-Jan-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying that the judge should have left to the jury the alternative conviction for manslaughter. The victim had died through strangulation during a sexual assault by the defendant. He said it had not . .
Cited – Regina v Maxwell CACD 11-May-1994
When directing the jury, the judge should mention all alternative and appropriate lesser offences with explanations. The possibility of a conviction under section 47 for assault occasioning actual bodily harm should be offered to a conviction under . .
Cited – Regina v Coutts HL 19-Jul-2006
The defendant was convicted of murder. Evidence during the trial suggested a possibility of manslaughter, but neither the defence nor prosecution proposed the alternate verdict. The defendant now appealed saying that the judge had an independent . .
Cited – Regina v Abu Hamza CACD 28-Nov-2006
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out . .
Cited – London Borough of Sutton v S Admn 26-Oct-2004
The Borough appealed against acquittal by the magistrates of the defendant parent accused of failure to ensure the regular attendance of their child at school. The child had attended only irregularly. The parents had contacted the school and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.220042

The defendant complained that the judge had not left an alternate verdict of careless driving to the jury where he had been charged with driving a motor vehicle on the road recklessly.
Held: The conviction was quashed.
Mustill LJ said: ‘These cases bear out the conclusion, which we should in any event have reached, that the judge is obliged to leave the lesser alternative only if this is necessary in the interests of justice. Such interests will never be served in a situation where the lesser verdict simply does not arise on the way in which the case has been presented to the Court: for example if the defence has never sought to deny that the full offence charged has been committed but challenges that it was committed by the defendant. Again there may be instances where there was at one stage a question which would, if pursued, have left open the possibility of a lesser verdict, but which, in the light of the way the trial has developed, has simply ceased to be a live issue. In these and other situations it would only be harmful to confuse the jury by advising them of the possibility of a verdict which could make no sense.
We can also envisage cases where the principal offence is so grave and the alternative so trifling, that the judge thinks it best not to distract the jury by forcing them to consider something which is remote from the real point of the case: and this may be so particularly where there are already a series of realistic alternatives which call for careful handling by judge and jury, and where the possibility of convicting for a trivial offence would be an unnecessary further complication.
On the other hand the interests of justice will sometimes demand that the lesser alternatives are left to the jury. It must be remembered that justice serves the interests of the public as well as those of the defendant, and if the evidence is such that he ought at least to be convicted of the lesser offence, it would be wrong for him to be acquitted altogether merely because the jury cannot be sure that he was guilty of the greater.’

Judges:

Mustill LJ, Hodgson and Wood JJ

Citations:

[1986] 1 WLR 1202, (1986) 83 Cr App R 251

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Rex v Parrott 1913
Phillimore J considered the possibility of allowing a conviction for a lesser offence than that charged and said: ‘There may be cases where, in the interests of the prisoner, a judge ought to do so; there are certainly many cases where the interests . .

Cited by:

Cited – Sutton London Borough Council v S and Another QBD 26-Oct-2004
Parents had had charges brought against them by the appellant for failing to ensure the attendance of their child at school dismissed. The authority appealed.
Held: The authority should have considered more carefully whether it was appropriate . .
Reviewed – Regina v Maxwell HL 1990
The defendant had hired two men to enter his former partner’s house to commit robbery. It was his defence that he did not contemplate violence, and that he was only guilty of the offence of burglary. The prosecution would not add a count of burglary . .
Cited – Regina v Maxwell CACD 1988
The defendant admitted paying two others to burgle his partner’s home, but said he had not anticipated violence, and appealed against his conviction for robbery, saying the judge should have left the alternative verdict to the jury. The jury, during . .
Cited – Coutts, Regina v CACD 21-Jan-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying that the judge should have left to the jury the alternative conviction for manslaughter. The victim had died through strangulation during a sexual assault by the defendant. He said it had not . .
Cited – Regina v Coutts HL 19-Jul-2006
The defendant was convicted of murder. Evidence during the trial suggested a possibility of manslaughter, but neither the defence nor prosecution proposed the alternate verdict. The defendant now appealed saying that the judge had an independent . .
Cited – London Borough of Sutton v S Admn 26-Oct-2004
The Borough appealed against acquittal by the magistrates of the defendant parent accused of failure to ensure the regular attendance of their child at school. The child had attended only irregularly. The parents had contacted the school and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.220041

If on an application made in respect of a confiscation order by the defendant the High Court is satisfied that the realisable property is inadequate for the payment of the amount remaining to be recovered under the order, the court shall issue a certificate to that effect giving the court’s reasons. The realisable property for this purpose is what the High Court determines to be the realisable property: the High Court is not constrained by what the Crown Court has held when making the confiscation order to be the realisable property.

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2495 (Admin)

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 83(1)

Cited by:

Cited – In the Matter of Christopher Adams, In the Matter of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 Admn 26-Nov-2004
The defendant appealed a refusal of a certificate of inadequacy to an amount due under a confiscation order, saying that the court had wrongly allowed for the value of a consultancy agreement under which he was entitled to receive an annual fee for . .
See Also – Glatt, Regina v CACD 17-Mar-2006
. .
See Also – Sinclair In her Capacity As the Former Receiver v Glatt Executors of Estate of Chaja Glatt and others Admn 2008
The claimant, the former court appointed receiver of the defendant’s estate under a criminal confiscation order under the 1988 Act made on the defendant’s conviction for money laundering sought to claim against the prisoner’s assets hed by the . .
See Also – Sinclair In her Capacity As the Former Receiver v Glatt Executors of Estate of Glatt and Glatt and Glatt CA 13-Mar-2009
The court considered the recovery of expenses by a receiver appointed to administer assets of money launderer. The receiver sought to exercise a lien over assets held for the prisoner by the prison to recover the costs of the receivership after the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.220268

Avory J said: ‘Headings of sections and marginal notes form no part of a statute. They are not voted on or passed by Parliament, but are inserted after the Bill has become law. Headnotes cannot control the plain meaning of the words of the enactment, though they may, in some case, be looked at in the light of preambles if there is any ambiguity in the meaning of the sections on which they can throw light.’

Judges:

Avory J

Citations:

[1934] 1 KB 354

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Montila and Others HL 25-Nov-2004
The defendants faced charges under the two Acts. They raised as a preliminary issue whether it is necessary for the Crown to prove that the property being converted was in fact the proceeds, in the case of the 1994 Act, of drug trafficking and, in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219891

‘The law is very clear. The court of trial possesses a discretion to allow a defendant to change his or her plea of Guilty to one of Not Guilty at any time before sentence even though the plea may be said to be unequivocal: see the decision of this court in Dodd (1981) 74 Crim App R (s) 50. The discretion must of course be exercised judicially. There must be some objective basis for allowing the plea to be changed. Some of the cases however, show that the discretion is, generally speaking, exercised sparingly in the defendant’s favour. In Cantor [1991] Crim LR 481 it was made plain that this court would not lay down any rules of practice concerning such changes of plea. It was for trial judges to decide how to respond to an application for that to be done.’

Judges:

Law LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 3020

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: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219683

Defendant’s right to apply to vacate a plea of guilty.

Citations:

[1968] 52 Cr App R 528

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: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219682

The court considered when a judge should allow a defendant to withdraw a plea of guilty: ‘only rarely would it be appropriate for the trial judge to exercise his undoubted discretion in favour of an accused person wishing to change an unequivocal plea of guilty to one of not guilty. Particularly this is so in cases where as here the accused has throughout been advised by experienced counsel, and where, after full consultation with his counsel, he has already changed his plea to one of guilty at an earlier stage in the proceedings.’ (Lord Lane CJ) Once such discretion is exercised, an appeal court should approach the question with even more care.
It is the verdict of a jury which constitutes the conviction for the purposes of the Act.

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

[1985] 1 WLR 914, (1985) 81 Cr App R 190

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 . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Toney Admn 14-Jul-2005
The defendant appealed a refusal to allow him to withdraw a plea of guilty. He was accused of assaulting his wife. He had had legal advice before interview and trial.
Held: Though the defendant had not waived privilege a note had been placed . .
Cited – Turk (Deceased) v Regina CACD 6-Apr-2017
Defendant’s death stops trial immediately
At his trial for serious sexual offences, the jury passed a note to the judge saying that they had reached unanimous verdicts on several counts. The judge did not pass the note to counsel, but instead asked the jury to retire overnight to try again . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219686

The court of appeal declined to lay down any rules of practice concerning changes of plea. It was for trial judges to decide how to respond to an application for that to be done.

Citations:

[1991] Crim LR 481

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: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219685

The defendant appealed his conviction, and sought to bring fresh evidence.
Held: The evidence had been available to the defendant at trial, and a decision made that her inconsistencies made it unsafe to call her. The defendant would not now be allowed to call her on appeal.

Judges:

Hooper LJ, Aitkens, Fulford JJ

Citations:

Times 13-Oct-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.216392

The defendants were accused of obtaining money by deception of an 80 year old lady. She was unable to give evidence on medical grounds.
Held: Though the judge had not referred to the 1988 Act, he had exercised his discretion properly. Asking the appropriate questions before admitting her statement and giving appropriate warnings to the jury.

Citations:

[1992] Crim L R 189

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 . .
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: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.199812

If an application to prefer a Voluntary Bill is successful there is no right of appeal, and nor can the decision be made subject to judicial review.

Citations:

[1990] CLR 654, [1990] 2 Admin LR 817

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re Racal Communications Ltd; In Re a Company HL 3-Jul-1980
Court of Appeal’s powers limited to those Given
The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal is wholly statutory; it is appellate only. The court has no original jurisdiction. It has no jurisdiction itself to entertain any original application for judicial review; it has appellate jurisdiction over . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camberwell Youth Court; Regina (H) v Camberwell Youth Court QBD 23-Jul-2004
The DPP sought directions as to the issuing of voluntary bills of indictment to have transferred to the Crown Court, allegations of robbery against youths between 12 and 14.
Held: A child convicted of an offence for which an adult would . .
Cited – Hussain, Regina (on the Application of) v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 29-Aug-2006
The claimant challenged the decision to extend his detention for questioning to 21 days. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.199545

Where assets had been seized in criminal proceedings, the court had power to order a payment to creditors only where the value of the assets would not be reduced.

Citations:

Times 15-Nov-1990

Cited by:

Cited – In re X (Restraint Order: Payment out) QBD 22-Apr-2004
A restraint order had been made in respect of the defendant’s assets pending trial. Application was made to release a sum to pay the defendant’s company debts.
Held: A payment could be made only where the the realisable value of the property . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.199326

The court gave general guidance on criminal practice. As to voluntary bills of indictment, to protect defendants: ‘save where there are good grounds for doing otherwise – (1) They must receive notice of an application for a Voluntary Bill with copies of all documents relied upon to support the application: (2) They must have an opportunity to make written submissions, and – (3) They may be invited to make oral submissions if the judge considers it necessary or desirable to hear their oral submissions.’

Citations:

[2002] 3 All ER 938, [2002] 1 WLR 2870

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Sullivan; Regina v Gibbs; Regina v Elener; Regina v Elener CACD 8-Jul-2004
The appellants, each convicted of murder, challenged the minimum periods of detention ordered to be served.
Held: As to the starting point for sentencing, judges should have regard to the published practice directions, and not the letter from . .
Cited – Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camberwell Youth Court; Regina (H) v Camberwell Youth Court QBD 23-Jul-2004
The DPP sought directions as to the issuing of voluntary bills of indictment to have transferred to the Crown Court, allegations of robbery against youths between 12 and 14.
Held: A child convicted of an offence for which an adult would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.198676

Evidence of a contemporaneous complaint by the complainant to her employer was admitted against objections that such evidence ought not to be admitted and the evidence should be confined merely to the fact of the complaint. The evidence of the complaint was similar to the complainants.
Held: As to the objection in principle to the admission of such evidence: ‘It is necessary, in the first place, to have a clear understanding as to the principles upon which evidence of such a complaint not on oath nor made in the presence of the prisoner nor forming part of the res gestae can be admitted. It is clearly not admissible as evidence of the facts complained of: those facts must therefore be established, if at all, upon oath by the prosecutrix or other credible witness, and, strictly speaking, ought to be given before evidence of the complaint is admitted. The complaint can only be used as evidence of the consistency of the conduct of the prosecutrix with the story told by her in the witness box, and as being inconsistent with her consent to that of which she complains. In every one of the old textbooks, proof of complaint is treated as a most material element in the establishment of a charge of rape or other kindred charge. . . It is too late, therefore now to make serious objection to the admissibility of evidence of the fact that a complaint was made, provided it was made as speedily after the acts complained of as could reasonably be expected.’ He then proceeded to consider whether it was only the fact of the complaint that should be admitted: ‘We proceed to consider the second objection, which is that the evidence of complaint should be limited to the fact that a complaint was made without giving any particulars of it. No authority binding on us was cited during the argument, either in support of or against this objection. We must therefore determine the matter upon principle.’ After setting out the authorities, he concluded: ‘After very careful consideration, we have arrived at the conclusion that we are bound by no authority to support the existing usage of limiting evidence of the complaint to the bare fact that a complaint was made, and that reason and good sense are against our so doing. The evidence is admissible on the ground that it was a complaint of that which is charged against the prisoner and can be legitimately used only for the purposes of enabling the jury to judge for themselves whether the conduct of the woman was consistent with her testimony on oath given in the witness-box negativing her consent, and affirming that the acts complained of were against her will, and in accordance with the conduct they would expect in a truthful woman under the circumstances detailed by her. The jury, and they only, are the persons to be satisfied whether the woman’s conduct was so consistent or not. Without proof of her condition, demeanour and verbal expressions, all of which are of vital importance in the consideration of that question, how is it possible for them satisfactorily to determine it? Is it to be left to the witness to whom the statement is made to determine and report to the jury whether what the woman said amounted to a real complaint? And are the jury bound to accept the witnesses’ interpretation of her words as binding upon them without having the whole statement before them, and without having the power to require it to be disclosed to them, even if they may feel it essential to enable them to form a reliable opinion? . . In reality, affirmative answers to such stereotyped questions as these ‘Did the prosecutrix make a complaint (a very leading question by the way) of something done to herself? Did she mention a name?’ amount to nothing to which any weight ought to be attached; they tend to embaEvidence of a contemporaneous complaint by the complainant to her employer was admitted against objections that such evidence ought not to be admitted and the evidence should be confined merely to the fact of the complaint. The evidence of the complaint was similar to the complainants.
Held: As to the objection in principle to the admission of such evidence: ‘It is necessary, in the first place, to have a clear understanding as to the principles upon which evidence of such a complaint not on oath nor made in the presence of the prisoner nor forming part of the res gestae can be admitted. It is clearly not admissible as evidence of the facts complained of: those facts must therefore be established, if at all, upon oath by the prosecutrix or other credible witness, and, strictly speaking, ought to be given before evidence of the complaint is admitted. The complaint can only be used as evidence of the consistency of the conduct of the prosecutrix with the story told by her in the witness box, and as being inconsistent with her consent to that of which she complains. In every one of the old textbooks, proof of complaint is treated as a most material element in the establishment of a charge of rape or other kindred charge. . . It is too late, therefore now to make serious objection to the admissibility of evidence of the fact that a complaint was made, provided it was made as speedily after the acts complained of as could reasonably be expected.’ He then proceeded to consider whether it was only the fact of the complaint that should be admitted: ‘We proceed to consider the second objection, which is that the evidence of complaint should be limited to the fact that a complaint was made without giving any particulars of it. No authority binding on us was cited during the argument, either in support of or against this objection. We must therefore determine the matter upon principle.’ After setting out the authorities, he concluded: ‘After very careful consideration, we have arrived at the conclusion that we are bound by no authority to support the existing usage of limiting evidence of the complaint to the bare fact that a complaint was made, and that reason and good sense are against our so doing. The evidence is admissible on the ground that it was a complaint of that which is charged against the prisoner and can be legitimately used only for the purposes of enabling the jury to judge for themselves whether the conduct of the woman was consistent with her testimony on oath given in the witness-box negativing her consent, and affirming that the acts complained of were against her will, and in accordance with the conduct they would expect in a truthful woman under the circumstances detailed by her. The jury, and they only, are the persons to be satisfied whether the woman’s conduct was so consistent or not. Without proof of her condition, demeanour and verbal expressions, all of which are of vital importance in the consideration of that question, how is it possible for them satisfactorily to determine it? Is it to be left to the witness to whom the statement is made to determine and report to the jury whether what the woman said amounted to a real complaint? And are the jury bound to accept the witnesses’ interpretation of her words as binding upon them without having the whole statement before them, and without having the power to require it to be disclosed to them, even if they may feel it essential to enable them to form a reliable opinion? . . In reality, affirmative answers to such stereotyped questions as these ‘Did the prosecutrix make a complaint (a very leading question by the way) of something done to herself? Did she mention a name?’ amount to nothing to which any weight ought to be attached; they tend to embarrass rather than to assist a thoughtful jury, for they are consistent either with there having been a complaint or no complaint of the prisoner’s conduct. To limit the evidence of complaint to such questions and answers is to ask the jury to draw important inferences from imperfect materials, perfect materials being at hand and in the cognizance of the witness in the box. In our opinion, nothing ought unnecessarily be left to speculation.’ The court went on to make it clear that a direction was to be given as to the purpose for which the evidence was admissible.rrass rather than to assist a thoughtful jury, for they are consistent either with there having been a complaint or no complaint of the prisoner’s conduct. To limit the evidence of complaint to such questions and answers is to ask the jury to draw important inferences from imperfect materials, perfect materials being at hand and in the cognizance of the witness in the box. In our opinion, nothing ought unnecessarily be left to speculation.’ The court went on to make it clear that a direction was to be given as to the purpose for which the evidence was admissible.

Judges:

Lord Russell of Killowen CJ, Hawkins J

Citations:

[1896] 2 QBD 167

Cited by:

Cited – Spooner, Eric Charles v Regina; (Evidence: Sex abuse) CACD 25-May-2004
The defendant appealed his convictions for child sex abuse, involving assault, rape and buggery, saying that evidence of a recent complaint by a schoolgirl friend of the complainant which was not consistent with other evidence of the complainant . .
Cited – White v The Queen PC 10-Aug-1998
(Jamaica) Where a rape complainant gave evidence to support the prosecution that she had complained of the offence immediately afterwards, the court should be careful to direct the jury of the caution to be applied to the weight given to that . .
Cited – Regina v Braye-Jones 1966
(Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal) The admissibility of evidence of recent complaint where the evidence of the complainant and the evidence of the contemporaneous complaint differed. Rejecting the suggestion that evidence of the contemporaneous . .
Cited – Regina v Beedles CACD 31-Jul-1996
The defendant appealed against his conviction for sexual assault. The issue was whether a note written by the complainant to her teacher was admissible as evidence of recent complaint to corroborate her statement. Similar allegations had been made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.198130

A Ghosh direction can be misleading for a jury.

Citations:

[1987] 84 Cr App R 117

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Ghosh CACD 5-Apr-1982
The defendant surgeon was said to have made false claims for payment for operations, and was charged under the 1968 Act. He claimed to have been entitled to the sums claimed, and denied that he had been dishonest. The court considered the meaning of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187646

Part of the duty of the Crown Prosecution service in deciding upon a prosecution is to avoid prosecutions which are oppressive as regards a defendant.

Judges:

Lord Widgery LCJ

Citations:

[1976] QB 496

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187443

The direction added to the composite Criminal Proceedings direction. Adding an obligation to notify the prosecution of appeals against sentence, and to provide opportunity to them to be represented at the hearing.

Judges:

Woolf LCJ

Citations:

Times 24-Oct-2003

Criminal Practice, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187189

The appellant said the different verdicts against him were inconsistent.
Held: ‘The principle in every case is whether the inconsistency is such that it would not be safe to allow the verdict to stand. The fact that two verdicts are logically inconsistent does not however make the verdict complained of unsafe unless the only explanation of the inconsistency must or might be that the jury was confused or adopted the wrong approach’. ‘When an appellant seeks to persuade this Court as his ground of appeal that the jury has returned a repugnant or inconsistent verdict, the burden is plainly on him. He must satisfy the Court that the two verdict cannot stand together, meaning thereby that no reasonable jury who had applied their mind properly to the facts in the case could have arrived at the conclusion and once one assumes that they were an unreasonable jury, or that they could not have reasonably come to the conclusion, then the convictions cannot stand . . . the burden is on the Appellant to show that verdicts upon different counts are not merely inconsistent but are so inconsistent as to demand interference by an appellate court.’

Judges:

Lord Parker, Chief Justice

Citations:

(1968) 52 Cr App R, (1968) 2 QB 433

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Van Der Molen CACD 20-Feb-1997
The appellant had been acquitted of rape, but convicted of indecent assault.
Held: ‘It did not follow that because the jury must have disbelieved a witness or rejected his or her evidence with the result that it acquitted on one count, it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185680

The sentencing judge had exceeded his powers by making a criminal bankruptcy order. S40 appeared to deny a right of appeal against such an order.
Held: There is a strong presumption that except by specific provision the legislature will not exclude a right of appeal as of right or with leave where such a right is ordinarily available, and the section must be construed as being subject to an implied limitation that an appeal would lie where the issue raised was that the court in making the order had exceeded the power conferred on it by Parliament. Court orders are effective in law, and must be obeyed, unless and until set aside. ‘The terms used to formulate the law by the judges of the Court of Appeal (which include myself in Wehner’s case) have not been happy. They have spoken of orders being void or null for lack of jurisdiction in the court to make them. But you cannot describe as a nullity an order made by a superior court of record, which is what the Crown Court is: section 4(1) of the Courts Act 1971. Nor is the question really one of jurisdiction: it is a question whether the court has exceeded its power. An order of the Crown Court, once made, may be in excess of its statutory power or otherwise irregular. But it is not a nullity. And it would undermine the authority of the criminal law if orders made by the highest court of trial in criminal matters could be disregarded as nullities. The order of the Crown Court stands unless and until set aside by the court itself upon application or, if appeal lies, by the appellate tribunal to which the appeal is taken. But the terms used by the courts do not vitiate their reasoning. . . .’

Judges:

Scarman L

Citations:

[1985] AC 46, [1984] 2 All ER 737, [1984] 3 WLR 393

Statutes:

Powers of Criminal Courts Act 1973 39 40(1), Courts Act 1971 4(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Wehner 1977
. .

Cited by:

Cited – West Yorkshire Police v Lincoln Crown Court and Another Admn 27-Apr-2005
Police officers had unlawfully tape recorded private and confidential conversations between a suspect in custody and his solicitor. The police officers who had been asked to investigate the complaint appealed against an order saying that the tapes . .
Cited – Regina v Maidstone Crown Court, ex Parte Harrow London Borough Council QBD 30-Apr-1999
The High Court may review, on an application made by a properly interested party, a decision made by a Crown Court under the Act. Although this related to a trial on indictment, the Crown Court judge had made an order without jurisdiction. . .
Cited – Regina v Dickens CACD 11-Apr-1990
The defendant had been convicted of conspiring to import cannabis, and made subject inter alia to a confiscation order.
Held: ‘ the object of the Act is to ensure, so far as is possible, that the convicted drug trafficker is parted from the . .
Cited – Regina v Emmett and Another HL 16-Oct-1997
The defendants had been arrested as they unloaded four tons of cannabis from a boat.
Held: Their appeal against a confiscation order was allowed despite the acceptance of a statement when the acceptance had been based on a mistake of law or . .
Cited – Longworth, Regina v HL 26-Jan-2006
The appellant had been given a conditional discharge for possession of one indecent photograph of a child on his computer. He challenged being placed on the sex offenders’ register.
Held: The proceedings did not involve, or have as any part of . .
Cited – Ashton , Regina v; Regina v Draz; Regina v O’Reilly CACD 5-Apr-2006
The court considered three appeals where there had been a procedural irregularity, and where the judge had taken some step to overcome that irregularity. In two cases the Crown Court judge had reconstituted himself as a district judge to correct a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185685

Citations:

(1992) 95 Cr App R 338

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Confirmed – Regina v Watson CACD 1988
The court indicated how a jury might be directed in the event of an apparent deadlock, given two public interests which tend to pull in opposite directions: (i) the imperative that a jury should be put under no pressure; and (ii) the desirability of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Morrison v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police CA 17-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages from the police for the manner of her arrest. At the civil trial, the jury had been undecided, and the court directed the jury as to resolution. The respondents appealed saying that the judge had put too much pressure on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184710

The Board (PC) has repeatedly treated applications for leave to appeal and the hearing of criminal appeals as being upon the same footing.

Citations:

(1892) AC 422

Cited by:

Cited – Ibrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(Hong Kong) The defendant was an Afghan subject with the British Army in Hong Kong. He was accused of murder. Having accepted the protection of the British Armed forces, he became subject to their laws. In custody, he was asked about the offence by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184201

The Board cannot give leave to appeal where the grounds suggested could not sustain the appeal itself; nor can it allow an appeal on grounds that would not have sufficed for the grant of permission to bring it. Misdirection, as such, even irregularity as such, will not suffice.

Citations:

(1893) AC 346

Cited by:

Cited – Ibrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(Hong Kong) The defendant was an Afghan subject with the British Army in Hong Kong. He was accused of murder. Having accepted the protection of the British Armed forces, he became subject to their laws. In custody, he was asked about the offence by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184202

There was tendered to the court what appeared to be a statement from a juror asserting that a majority of the jury had been ready to acquit until the foreman read out a list of the previous convictions of the accused.
Held: ‘This court is now asked to enquire into the matter and to adjourn in order to see whether the alleged statement by the juryman can be supported by some statement or affidavit made by him. But the court has come to the conclusion that it is perfectly idle to adjourn the case for that purpose, because the court is quite satisfied that they would have no right at all to enquire as to what did occur in the jury room. It has for long been a rule of practice, based on public policy, that the court should not enquire by taking evidence from jurymen as to what did occur in either the jury box or the jury room.’

Judges:

Lord Parker CJ

Citations:

(1962) 4 Cr App R 72

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v BM and Another CACD 9-Dec-1996
A message was offered to one of the solicitors acting for a defendant from a relative of a juror after the trial.
Held: Rules against hearing of jury deliberations are wider than Contempt of Court Act. The court refused to commence any Young . .
Cited – Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza HL 22-Jan-2004
Extension of Inquiries into Jury Room Activities
The defendants sought an enquiry as to events in the jury rooms on their trials. They said that the secrecy of a jury’s deliberations did not fit the human right to a fair trial. In one case, it was said that jurors believed that the defendant’s use . .
Cited – Regina v Young (Stephen) CACD 30-Dec-1994
Jury Consulting Ouija Board – Serious Irregularity
It had been suggested that during their overnight stay in a hotel after retiring to consider their verdict, some of the jurors had consultated an ouija board to consult with the deceased, and to ask him who had been his killer. Having believed that . .
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: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183496

The defendant was charged with a common law conspiracy. It had been held that the only proper charge was of conspiracy to obtain by deception. The defendant was convicted upon an indictment which did not charge him accurately with the only offence for which he could properly be indicted.
Held: The misdescription of the offence in the statement of offence as a common law conspiracy to defraud had in the circumstances not the slightest practical significance and that there had been no actual miscarriage of justice

Citations:

[1984] AC 447, [1984] 1 All ER 619, (1984) 78 Cr App R 232

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Graham, Kansal, etc CACD 25-Oct-1996
The court discussed when it was appropriate for the Court of Appeal to substitute other lesser convictions, after the main conviction had been declared unsafe.
Held: After studying the authorities at length, the court felt that the various . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183246

The defendant appealed against his conviction. Though unrepresented at trial, the judge had not informed him of his opportunity to call witnesses. Counsel had failed to attend and an adjournment has been refused.
Held: The appeal succeeded. A trial court must inform an unrepresented accused of his constitutional entitlement to the facilities both to examine witnesses for the prosecution and to call his own witnesses and to facilitate the process in that behalf.
Lord Parker of Waddington CJ said: ‘it became imperative to ensure that this appellant, who was unrepresented, had every opportunity of putting forward his defence, calling his witnesses, and for that purpose, the court should have given him every assistance.’ and ‘the appellant, unrepresented as he was did not in the result have a fair trial, and . . it would be wrong in this case to apply the proviso.’

Judges:

Lord Parker of Waddington CJ

Citations:

[1960] 44 Cr App R 225

Cited by:

Cited – Leslie Tiwari v The State (Appeal No 76 of 2001) PC 29-May-2002
(Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant appealed convictions for rape and other offences based upon identification evidence. He had not been represented at the trial. He had not been warned of his freedom to call witnesses.
Held: Where a defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183102