The appellant challenged her conviction in her absence. She had submitted a letter from her GP and been reassured that the matter would not proceed and had not attended. The prosecutor objected that the letter was weak, and the case did proceed, after failed attempts to obtain more information.
Held: The decision was quashed: ‘The decision of the court was taken without really considering the controverted fact. Nor did the court consider the Criminal Procedure Rules, which do assist courts and should be referred to in such a situation, balancing the rights of a defendant who is a witness against the strong need of the court not to have time wasted by adjournments that are not well-founded, particularly when poorly founded on very vague medical information. ‘
Judges:
Gross LJ, Irwin J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 332 (Admin)
Links:
Criminal Practice
Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.452700