A police officer is not acting in the execution of his duty by arresting or detaining someone unless that arrest or detention is lawful. Justices are not entitled to infer that a police officer was acting in the course of his duty in carrying out a search pursuant to section 18 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act from his bare, albeit unchallenged assertion in evidence that he was carrying out such a search.
Watkins LJ, gave guidance as to the form in which a case should be stated saying: ‘The Justices must endeavour to ensure in stating a case that, (1) the whole of their findings of fact are contained in one and of course an early paragraph of the case . . ‘
Judges:
Watkins LJ
Citations:
(1990) 91 Cr App R 14
Statutes:
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 18
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Blench v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 5-Nov-2004
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty under section 89. He had argued that he had no case to answer. The officers had received an emergency call to the house, but the female caller . .
Cited – Sykes v Crown Prosecution Service (Manchester) Admn 16-Oct-2013
The defendant appealed against his conviction for obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty, saying that there had been no evidence that at the time of the events, the officer was acting in the lawful execution of his duty. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime, Police, Magistrates
Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.425321
