turning them to our seven topic. The criminal procedurals, indictments, joinder and severance. The criminal procedurals amended in 2015. And in fact, I think we are expecting another up stateswoman in in the emulation to them are having an ever increasing impact on trials. Marconi in terms of case management, as we all know, but in relation to substantive issues, too. Following Lord Justice holds Review the criminal justice system, it was felt necessary to codify the various rules that's existed and put them into one place. In 2005 the criminal procedure rules were introduced just pausing there. If you look in the notes and indeed on the strides that you'll be seeing that these lectures, too, you'll see that are summarized criminal procedurals as crim within a Capital P and R. We were advised recently that this is the correct abbreviation for criminal procedures. Have many of you know the civil procedure always exist on? Of course, the family procedure Ross to so to distinguish in criminal procedure or from the simple procedurals were invited to summarize its to crimen PR, especially in cases where, for example, you might be referring to both the criminal procedural on the simple procedurals in the same skeleton argument, for example, returning them to the substantial part. Of course, initially they were honored, Maurin, the Breach wrote in the observance, but they recently began to bite the criminal procedurals. He's perhaps instructed to have a look at two examples of how having them batting practice, firstly by reference to the rules themselves and secondly, from Case for as a lot, good Africans know the defense are, of course, entitled to make an opening speech to the jury immediately are for the crown of closed their case before any evidence is called. The prerequisite before it could be done, however, is that the defense must be intending to call of these one Witness of truth sign from the defendant. As many of you will know, this very, very rarely happened in practice. I can say for my own practice any time I've ever seen. It happens in a murder trial, and it was a Q C use defending. So it's certainly not something to be encouraged or something to be done routinely by defence practitioners. Part 25 of the criminal procedurals have supplemented this rights to extend to assisted your Nigerian his comprehension of the evidence before witnesses a called and this is set houses, we say about 25 which has had a trial and sentence in the Crown Court. And it says 25. A identification for the G eight off issues in the case on the rule says briefly that it provides the defendant or his or her advocates to set out the issues in the defendant's own terms, subjects superintendents by the court immediately after the prosecution open any sense. Identification of issues at this stage is not to be treated as a substitute for the extension of the summary of the defense case, which could be given later under the criminal procedural 25.92 g and its purpose is to provide. The jury focuses to the issues there like you, called upon to the sign said the Jewish will be alert to those issues from the outset and can evaluate the prostitution evidence that they hear accordingly. For that purpose, the defendant is not confined to what is included and statement there. Any divergence from the defense statement would, of course exposed defendant toe and first comment or inference, and for the defendants take the opportunity of this day so I don't find issues. Masses, even in a while, he or she wishes to announce, is that the prosecution is being put to prove, practically in some cases, for the Crown Court. His power is not really being employed in simple cases where, for example, department provides an accounting interview on re X rated action. A defense statement there is little to be gained delicately by its dressed in the jury. In other cases, however, there will certainly be more of an advantage in this taking place. For example, where no account was providing an interview, of course, Juries will be sat scratching their heads, wondering what issue that for is in the case equally in more long run. In cases such as murder or, in particular food with multi handed cases, judges are using the pound to order that's conquered the defense statement in some cases provided to the jury. The benefits office approaching long running cases, I hope, obvious but arguably a welcome development. I love the jury sitting three days, weeks and months of evidence wanting what the defense cases they will know from the outset there before being to affect the evidence with that in the forefront of their mind, love and simply waiting for the defendant if he or she gets into the witness box to get him to witness box and then announced his or her defense, or at least give them more details about it, turning them through the case law, arguably a rather fascinating demonstration off the use of case management powers under the Criminal procedure rules can be seen from the case off Boardman back in 2015. So Brian Levinson, giving the judgment of the court, set out the brief background. And he said, this case is another example of the problems arise when cases are not progressed properly or in accordance with the criminal procedurals. Other directions off course. The upshot. Waas that on the 15th of October 2014 in the Cradle court chest there before his owner judge doesn when the respondent was due to face trial on indictment alleging a number of counts of stalking country Section four a of the protection from the last caps 1997 the judge was faced with an application by the respondent through journey on the grounds that significant material. I don't even served a few days before on required expert analysis, which would take three weeks. The prosecution, in the form of CBS, agreed that it was appropriate. Would you on the trial in the event Judge Dutton was not prepared to take that agreed course agree, of course, between parties, not by the court. He rolled the due to delay on the part of the prosecution evidence of telephone call data records on telephone, self side date that would be excluded. The Syrian perception. 78 of Pace. This ruling effectively brought the prosecution to an end on. As a result, the think yes applied for leave to appeal the terminates we ruin pursuant to the provisions Exception, 58 often criminal justice at 2003 courses already referred to. It is not necessary to set out any more fans, but the judgment in itself is worth reading in its entirety. For our purposes, it is sufficient to note that the Court of Appeal refused the prosecution's application to appeal. They ruled that judge dot and had acted entirely appropriately and refusing the Germans. But perhaps the most interesting aspect of the judgment comes from almost footnotes in the closing remarks off Sir Brian Levinson, and he remarked this before leaving. In this case, however, it is necessary to sound notes a warning first, although nothing was made at the point before, the judge will before this court the fact that the defense ministers did not alert the court to the problems of non disclosure at a time when something could have been done about it, but in brackets, but left the complaint so late that the trial date could not be mount. Close brackets meant that the core was deprived of the opportunity, often earlier listing to resolve issues which could be resolved on maintain the trial days. It would be perfectly open to the judge to decide that the consequences of such a failure of duty on the part of the defense should they to reject a complaint of prejudice consequent upon the need for an a German. In each case, the impacts of whatever breaches are established will be for the judge to assess very mind that particular circumstances of the case on the overriding objective. So we have there I would suggest the salad. She reminded SEL criminal criminal practitioners that they are under it that we are under a positive duty to inform the court should the crown fail to abide by an order. Likewise, the crown. In respect of the defense here, the Court of Appeal took a very dim view of raising the matter so late. The court was put in an unenviable position and denied effects with the option of making orders when times still on everyone side. So the case could be managed on the trial date kept if you read the full judgment important in the fact the defense, in fact required four weeks to analyze the telephone evidence, which was the issue in the case. Therefore, if you're in the defense's position again in such a case, arguably, you'd want to be raising the issue good for the course at least four months out of sorry, four weeks out if no six weeks in advance, so that the quarters then got time. Teoh make orders and ensure child ate a cat. It's very much I suggested changing mentality and a change in mindset so well been sitting and waiting for the crown to do things on, then turning up and raising the issues on the day with the courts. It is incumbent on us. I think now is practitioners to advise course off failures for the rule state, and they that is incumbent on us, the practitioners to raise any failure by the other party with court. However, I think Boardman takes that a step further to say that if we don't, we may be the leaders in the long run insensible. If you're defending and you want to raise something and you don't leave through their trial, then the court may say I'm simply not going to listen to it, moving on them to join their severance of indictments. The issue of the indictment is, of course, in the course of one trials to be won or lost on such matters. However, the day they practicalities off them and I want to wait a while. I just feel that they might be. The move surrounding indictments are now complained in the Criminal procedurals 2015 Part 10 and very briefly 10.2 states, and alleged to former contents of the indictment that an indictment must be in one of the forms sent counts in the practice direction on must contain in a paragraph called account statement of the events charts that describes the offense in ordinary language on defines any identified any legislation that creates it on such particulars of a conduct constitutes in the commission of the offense after make clear what the prosecutor alleges against the defendant. Secondly, more than one in that one incident of the commission of the offense maybe included an account. If those incidents taken together amounts, of course, of conduct having regard to the time, place or purpose of commission. Thirdly, on indictment may contain more than one county for the offenses charged. Hey, I found, um saying France or be four part series of offense of same or similar counter. And fourthly, accounts must be numbered consecutively consecutively. And I may contain any counts charging substantially the same offenses, one specified in the notes of defense or offenses for which the defendant was sent for trial and be any other count based on the prosecution evidence already served, which the Crown Court may try. Now, of course, looking about, it's quite you look to it. But arguably one of the most important developments is that part, too, which said that more than one incident of the commission of the offence may be included in account if those incidents taken together amount, of course, of conduct having regard to the time, place or perks of commission. So, for example, you might be representing or deep prosecuting somebody who has committed 10 offenses of burglary, and you may want to include them all in a single count. It may be, for example, there are conspiracy counts and you want to have a cynical counts of the indictment as well. And you may include all of those in the same count now, which is a say. It's a significant change. Previously, I think many lawyers would have been arguing about bad for duplicity in terms of setting up two offenses in one count, returning them to the law on the law in relations and diamonds set out in the rather old now Indictment Act of 1915 in Section five states apart one where, before trial or at any stage of the trial, it appears to the court of the indictment is affected. The court shall make such order the amendments of the indictment, as the court thinks necessary to meet the circumstances of the case unless having regard to the merits of the case, the required amendment cannot be made without injustice. So, in other words, the prosecution may amend the indictment if it doesn't result in injustice. Secondly, where in Diamond is amended, a note of the order shall be endorsed on the indictment on the indictment should be treated for the purposes of the trial and all proceedings in connection there with having been signed by the proper officer in the amended form. Have some of you may know been issues over the years with indictments where amended it diamonds, for example haven't been signed? The law has in fact, changed as a result about to say that where it didn't signed, that does not result in the trial becoming invalid. Part three. Where before a trial at any stage trying 1/4 of the opinion that person accused may be prejudiced or embarrassed in his defense by reason of being charged more than one offense in the same diamond. All that for any other reason it is desirable to direct. The person should be tried separately for any one or more offenses charged in the indictment. The court may order a separate trial of any counter accounts off such indictments. So in other words, Section five Subsection three is the section where we find the power to sever the indictment. So it may be, for example, police go and seize property from your clients address in relation to a burglary on while they're there, they find a computer upon which they find indecent images of Children or images of child sexual abuse. They want to charge him, obviously, with the burger offense they also wants. Charge me the other offense, and it may be therefore that you, the crown do charging on separate indictments equally. If they were to put all those counts on both those counts on the same indictment, you may want to rt severance, and that's where you find the power to do that, Fourthly, then where before trial or attending stage of the trial quarters of opinion that the postponement of the trial of the person accuses expedient that the consequences of the exercise of any power court under this hand to amend it and diamond or to order a separate trial. The court should make such orders to the postponement of the trial. It appears necessary, continuing in our previous tonality with a burglary and decent images. Okay, It may be, for example, that the court order severance and therefore you delay one of trials at the practical point while I think of it, whenever that happens, you will want to consider the listing quite often. What courts will want to do is they want to list your case, bounce about i e. They want out the trial of one of those and then they want to have a child centred one. One practical issue that you often until that always need to really consider is the issue of Julie contamination. So, for example, if John Smith were to be tried with on those two separate and diamonds, the trial for the burglary, for example might any last two days, maybe three at the end of the trial, of course the jury pool or the jury would be dismissed back into the jury pool. Now, of course, the last thing you'd want is for the next trial to be lifted within that warned list period on that same chords, wherever it is you're sitting now, of course, some courts have different warm periods, but the important thing is that second trial. The whole reason you ordered separate trials is to avoid prejudice, to avoid one jury knowing about the other matters. So make sure that second trial is always listed outside the warned list period of that court. So, for example, you might want to lift the trial of the start of the first warned list to make sure that all the jurors who were present on the first trial are well clear of the core building and hopefully then return to their normal lives before the new Jiri is summoned from these, the new jury, Portland and the people have been summoned to come along. Bear that in mind. It is a practical issue to consider if, for example, you do ever have back to back separate charges against the same defendant. Part five then says where an order of the court has made under this section percent for travel for a postponement. It's such an old is made during the trial court may order Jerry be discharged from giving about it on the counter accounts. So maybe, for example, in the middle of the trial, some evidence comes out, which the judge actually says, I think that was prejudicial. I'm gonna dismiss the jury and order postponement off. This counts equally apart. Bay says the procedure on a separate trial of accounts should be the same. In all respected account been founded in a separate diamond on the procedure on a pro postpone child should be the same in all Spanx on a subsection C. The court may make sumption order as to granting the accused person bail after the enlargement of reconnaissance is an otherwise so that deals with the issue of bail on a finally subsection six. Any power of the courts under this section should be, in addition to and not in delegation of any other power se turning them to the old indictment rules which used to refer to a phrase known as nexus. In fact, Orel, this has been superseded by paragraph 10.3 off the criminal procedurals. I know that all is required toe account to an indictment. Is Wasit set out in the rules as we just looked at a section 51 This goes on to sent out the test of injustice seven to the order and whilst beyond the scope of our considerations in this pursuit of this course. It should be noted that to achieve severance with a high hurdle, which must be crossed when examining the case. Law authority, in fact, dates back to the sixties in cases involving the Kray twins, when they were charged with a double murder in case there was no separate and both were convicted. So just to conclude that point, so the procedure would be the prosecution would with draft an indictment, it would have the various counts on. If there is a nexus in fact or law, meaning that the two could be joined, then the court would join it. You then, if the defense, if you're defending, would then apply the severance off the indictment so you wouldn't free down opposed the joinder you may well, except that there is some nexus in fact or law. However, it is part of your application. You might concede that there is an exercise in fact in law and therefore concede that the count should be joined. However, your supplementary application would be then to say. However, now they've been joined. I submit that they should be seven because there is injustice. It sounds a little convoluted, but That's the way the law insect house and that's there for the procedure. First you enter, they should be joined. Secondly, then whether they should be savagely to injustice, turning them. Teoh adding summary offenses to indictments. This is an important little area to know about when dealing with trials in the Crown Court. It's the type of thing right at the end of the trial that will really head on. Throw Gene you advocates. Once you know the rules, is it? Well, you'll never forget them. But of course, you must know to start with. The ability of the Crown Court to deal with some offenses is set out in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 That Section six Infection six says power the Crown Court to deal with somewhere offense. Subsection one. This paragraph applies where Magistrates Court Center person for trial. Therefore, we looking in section 51 of the crime of disorder on bacon uh, enterprise, where Magistrates court center parts per child under Section 51. Off this out, four offenses, which includes a summary offence subsection 2 70 for persons convicted on the indictment. The Crown Court should consider whether the summary offenses related to the offence triable only on indictment or the case may be any of the offenses that are so tribal so died from the fence, which you sent for trial. If the case may be any of the indictment, offenses would use scent subsection three. It says that if it considers that someone franciso related the course of state to the person substance of the event and asking whether we grieve guilty or not apart subsection for if the person does plead guilty, the Crown courts will convict him, but may deal with him in respect of the summary offence only in a manner in which a Magistrates court could have dealt with him. So, in other words, the Crown Court powers are limited to those off the Magistrates court. Of course, it is a summary, then there's no difficulty there because the maximum, of course, is six months whether you're in the Crown Court or in the Magistrates Court, subsection six. So in subsection five other If he did not plead guilty, the powers of the Crown Court shall cease in respect of self defense except as provided by some power. About six, which states that subsections paragraphs. 60. The prosecution inform the court they were not designed to submit evidence on the charge related to some offense. The court shall dismiss it now. Love and just read the dry, substantive law. Let's trying a pirate A on examples. Consider there for the defendant meters charge when the guide below your either way offence our trial. He's convicted on that defense. He made it. If he wants to admit summary only matter on our behalf that dealt with the same time he is sentenced for a substantial. Often it will make little, if any difference sentence. And it will make perfect sense your climb to admit it. I'm have everything there with together. If he doesn't not not admitted, the case must be permitted to the Magistrates Court for trial. So, for example, your client is sent to the ground court on offense. Section 20. Grievous bodily harm. He's convicted after trial for now. Also sense was a summary offence off assaulting a police officer. He may then decide to plead guilty to that because in reality it may well be a sentence. Whatever sentence he gets with defenses will be concurrent Hinckley. The same defendant may be acquitted of section 20 the crown May they want you wish to offer now evidence on the summer and data on that will be end of it. For example, it may be that the police officers were the witnesses to section 20 on the crown. When they look at it, think Well, the jury didn't believe them or they weren't convinced in relation to their arguments in relation to Section 20. Therefore, the chances of being convinced on the evidence of the so PC Monte quite slender. And so you might take the views that prosecutor that evidentially you don't have sufficient evidence to prosecute. You could therefore offer no evidence in relation to that Crown Court. However, if the Crown did wish to proceed to trial, the case would have to be remitted to the Magistrates Court for trial. So, in other words, it might be your kind was arrested for Section 20 offensive A public house. He was arrested, having been identified from CCTV. On upon arrest, he assaulted the police officers. He's acquits the perception 20. But the defense, the crown tape of you they still want to prosecuting yourself in the office is upon us. therefore case about he remitted to the Magistrates Court for trial to ensure the defendant. I admit the events and the sentence. He denies it and had the case you're making for trial or the crown off in evidence. Those air effectively the three options. As I said at the outset, not only difficult, but I never got to be acquainted with that kind of thorny issue. It always raise his head right to the end of a case, just as you picked up your papers and your amounts. Four counts of court. The other well known sections in relation to Somalia defenses in the Crown Court are section sort of. The Criminal Justice Act 1988. Infection 51 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Scheduled three thes sections helpfully set out what some inferences may be included. I an indictment As more turn its accounts to the indomitable offense charge, which may be an either way. Offence is defined under Section 17 of the Magistrate's Court 1980 so they refer to Adam guards defense it made. It doesn't have to be an indomitable only offense. I tried on indictment. So, for example, a BH tried on indictment. Then it becomes an indomitable offense, not in danceable only events. Section 40 says power to join the diamond count for common assault except so account. Charging a person with a summary offence to which this section applies may be included in the indictment. If the charge is founded on the same facts or evidence of a count, charging a dime civil offense will be is part of a series of offense that same or seven character as an indicted for the offense, which is also charged but don't need. In either case, the faster reverence right to defense are disclosed by material, which, in pursuance of the regulations on the central three, has been set on the past challenged Subsection two, Where account charging an offense to it see section of prizes included in the diamonds. The adventure we tried in the same manner as if he weren't in dimes will offend, but the crown call may only deal with defending respect a bit in the manner in which a Magistrates court couldn't get with him again. Subsection two limits sentencing powers for those off the much stripes. Subsection three defenses to its reception applies are a common salt a An offence under Section 19 name They sold in prison custody. So a d. A. Sultan's your training sense of custody officer a CIA Socially secure college custody. Be talk taking a most vehicle. Other convince man stability He driving a motor vehicle want disqualified the that offense mentioned in the first column of Schedule two to the magistrate's Court. So things are criminal damage which would otherwise be tribal only summarily by virtue of Section 22 2 on the any somewhere defense specified under subsection full subsection 47 Sexual state may by order by some mystery instruments specified for the purposes of dissection. Any summary offence, which is punishable with imprisonment, growing bulbs obligatory or discretionary disqualification from driving. So you'll need to look at the Statue of Simulation to for those offenses. An example of an offence under Section 43 d would be criminal damage is seen or AC aerated being taken where the damage was not from £5000. Importantly, and unlike the other sections that sets out the offenses which not just dealt with final Crown Court, it can be included on the indictment. Jury to return a vervet which are of course a very important distinctions. So it may be the common sold. The latitude indictment is not tell it'd to actual bodily harm, although somewhat unlikely because, of course, the offenses are quite similar to incorrectly. Include any other somewhere fence would lack the necessary lawful authority and render otherwise body proceedings and knowledge e, which was a point highlighted in the case of Guard G A. H 2000 and nine. Some practitioners may be familiar with the old Section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 which of course swallowed on Section 40. This has now been repealed by the Crime Criminal Justice and 2 2000 and three in June 2012 on replaced by Schedule three off Section 51 of the Crime of disorder subsection one. It now said Where and I Don't appears was brought before Magistrates called. The court charged with the defense on any of the conditions mentioned Subsection two below, satisfied the course was sending forth with to the Crown Court for trial for the event. These conditions are a that the offence is an offence triable only on indictment of the one in respect of which makes has been given under section 51 Deal 51 c. We could see that phrase they mentioned again when notice has been given. So if you are in the situation, then you need to check The paperwork was provided to you and see what evidence was disclosed and what notice has been given in relation to what defenses at substation the that the offence is an either way offence and the court is required under Section 79 20 Substation nine B 21 Trump's to Row 23 section section of the Magistrates Court out to proceed in accordance with subsection one above, or see that notice is given to the course under section 51. B off. If you want to see, we don't go in subsection three, we says where the court, sending out of trial of subsection one and shown the same time sent into the Crown Court for trial for any either way or summary offence with which is charged on which a. If it's an either way, offence appears to the court to be related to defence mentioned or be somewhere Fence appears because he relates to the fence mentioned in subsection one above or to the either way offence on which fulfills the requisite condition as defined in subsection 11 below to skip subsection of a four year. And it says that a summary offence fulfils the requisite condition if it is punishable with imprisonment or involves obligatory or discretionary disqualification from driving. So, in other words, incentives like common assault or humorous driving offenses will be included in that definition. Meeting back then to subsection four, where an adult who has been sent for trial under subsection one subsequently peers or four before Magistrates Court charged with an eye away. A summary offence, which appears to be related or, in the case of a summary offence, fulfils the requisite condition the court makes sent in four foot to the Crown Court for trial for the either way or somebody offends the rest of the aunties set out in a note for the exception, he set out to the names. I'm not going to trouble you by reading the rest of it to you, but in terms off those the cause, power is well, we're having a read off sections in terms of what constitutes being related because, of course, being related is a phrase that we've mentioned several signs now being related to the Dyson offense. Schedule three in Paragraph six states that the summary offenses related if it quotes a ride it out of circumstances which are the same or connected with those giving rise close quote to the indomitable offense. So it must, it said, arise out of circumstances which are the same or connected with those giving lines to game dice. Will offense procedure then mirrors deception? 40 procedure. So the procedure in terms of pleading guilty, the crown offering no evidence or if it's denied limiting back to the Magistrates court. So there's three options again remain in relation to the procedure. The defender will be asked to enter a plea. If he pleads guilty, the Crown Court would deal with it. If you plead not guilty, it will be remitted to the Magistrates, courts and of course, the Crown Court dismissed the charge of the crown. No longer wish to proceed. Ensure Therefore, these are limited situations in which summary only offences can appear on indictment or be dealt with by the Crown Court either is a specified offence under section 40 art. Same facts or evidence all part of the series of offenses on then Finally, under schedule three. Defense must carry sentence of imprisonment or disqualification from driving on. Additionally, allies out of the same circumstances there for an offence under Section five. Public Order Act 1986 could therefore never repair on indictment or alongside side charges on an indictment, because, of course, it is not imprison Herbal Finally, before House fails, don't forget Section 66 of the course at 2003 which allows a Crown court just to sit, is a district judge on then exercise the same powers as would be open to him or her. Under Section 41 course, Section 66 1 states judges having powers of district judges, brackets, Magistrates, court every holder of a judicial office specified in subsection to have the powers of a justice of the peace who is a district judge. Stimulation to a criminal causes and matters. I have not reproduced the rest of the section. If you do need to deal with it, then of course, please come before section. But that's where you would go to in that short get out of jail free card. I hope if you're in the situation and you need to deal with some administrative matters to make sure your case got to the Crown Court the right way, you can ask the Crown Court Judge to sit a district judge effectively on make sure the case gets to the Crown Court the right way and continue with the proceedings. Hopefully Meaning? You don't need to John about. Okay, perhaps not the most interesting section, but it is a need to know sexual in terms off indict, herbal and somewhere defenses on the diamond on the indictment Germany, you never know when it might come in handy and you never know when it might just win the case for you.
Webinar
Notes
781 Users
10 Courses
7 Reviews
