The defence had requested and been give a ruling of no case to answer. The prosecutor now appealed saying that this had been before he had closed the prosecution case, and had been not with his consent.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded. The Galbraith case did not suggest that the judge had the power he had taken. Such a ruling required either that the prosecution’s case had been formally closed, or that the effect of the prosecutor’s evidence had been agreed: ‘There is sound reason for the jurisdiction to entertain a submission that there is no case to answer to be exercised at the close of the Crown case. It is then that it is known for certain what the evidence actually is. Until then, the most that can be known is what it is expected to be. In the present case, whilst it was known what the witness statements said, it could not be known exactly how the evidence would come out. ‘
Judges:
Lord Justice Hughes, Mr Justice Teare and Mr Justice Saunders
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Crim 1223, Times 25-Aug-2008, [2009] 1 Cr App Rep 3, [2008] 1 WLR 2684
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Appeal pending – Chargot Ltd (T/A Contract Services) and Others, Regina v CACD 13-Dec-2007
The defendant company appealed against its conviction under the 1974 Act after a driver was buried under the load when his truck overturned on a work-site.
Held: The appeal failed. The policy of the 1974 Act was to impose a positive burden on . .
Cited – Regina v Chairman, London County Quarter Sessions, ex parte Downes 1953
The Judge had acceded to a defence submission of no case, made in advance of arraignment on the basis of the depositions, and had quashed the indictments.
Held: The Divisional Court granted an order of mandamus requiring the court to try the . .
Cited – Regina v Griffiths 1981
The Judge had purported to strike out a number of cases on the ground that prosecuting counsel was not immediately in court when they were called on. He then ordered that verdicts of ‘not guilty’ be entered. The Crown obtained voluntary bills of . .
Cited – Regina v Leadbeater 1988
The Judge was invited by both prosecution and defence to rule in advance of the case being opened whether there was a case to answer. He ruled that there was. The Defendant thereupon pleaded guilty. He appealed.
Held: The appeal failed. The . .
Cited – Regina v MacKenzie 1993
The defendant had been charged with two killings. The evidence depended on confessions he had made. He had, however, confessed also to twelve other killings, none of which the Crown believed he could have committed and at least some of which he . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2000) CACD 23-Nov-2000
The defendant had faced a charge of possessing an offensive weapon, namely a rice flail. The judge invited the prosecution to reconsider the case before it started, but the case went ahead. After the jury was empanelled, but before the prosecutor . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.270458
