The claimant was a long term prisoner released on licence. He had been stopped and charged with conspiracy to supply a controlled drug. He pleaded not guitly. He challenged revocation of his licence.
Held: A charge alone was not sufficient to justify a recall to prison. To do so would be to delegate the board’s authority to te hprosecuting authorities, and nor could a prisoner be given a fair hearing. The revocation of the ground that he constituted a risk to the public.
Judges:
Stanley Burnton J
Citations:
Times 22-Jun-2005
Statutes:
Criminal Justice Act 1991 32(6)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina on the Application of Brooks v The Parole Board CA 10-Feb-2004
The court had to decide the extent to which the Parole Board could rely on hearsay evidence in a case in which a discretionary life prisoner’s licence had been revoked. The evidence was crucial to the issue of risk.
Held: (majority) The . .
Cited – Regina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals) HL 27-Jan-2005
Each defendant challenged the way he had been treated on revocation of his parole licence, saying he should have been given the opportunity to make oral representations.
Held: The prisoners’ appeals were allowed.
Lord Bingham stated: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Prisons
Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.227920
