23 sept Flashcards
A defendant is convicted of theft. Following conviction, the court wants to impose a community order as punishment.
Before imposing a community order, of what must the court be satisfied?
ResponsesPress Enter or Space to submit the answer
The most suitable sentence for the offender is a community order.
(A) A community order can be imposed only if the court considers a community order to be the most suitable sentence for the offender. (B) and (C) are wrong, as whilst the court may request a report from the probation service to consider the defendant’s suitability for various requirements including rehabilitation programmes, this is not a requirement. (D) is wrong, as the capacity of the probation service is not a relevant consideration in deciding on a penalty. (E) is wrong, as a defendant can receive more than one community order. QU
A defendant took part in an identification parade. The defendant had no legal representation during the procedure. He has a teardrop tattoo on his face that was not covered, and only one of the other videos in the identification parade featured someone with a similar tattoo. The solicitor now representing the defendant is applying to have it excluded.
What is the test under PACE 1984 for the court to apply in deciding whether to exclude the identification evidence?
Whether its admission would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of trial that it ought to be excluded.(A) A court has discretion to exclude evidence offered by the prosecution if it appears to the court, considering all the circumstances, that admission of the evidence would have an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceeding. (B), (C), (D), and (E) are therefore all incorrect, as they do not correctly cite the test to be applied when deciding whether to exercise this discretion.
A defendant was arrested on suspicion of theft. He was taken to the police station where he was interviewed. The defendant was unrepresented in interview. During the course of the interview, police officers told the defendant there is CCTV footage showing him committing the offence. In light of this, the defendant confessed to the offence. In fact, there is no CCTV footage. At trial, the defence now seek to have the confession excluded.
Is the confession likely to be excluded?
ResponsesPress Enter or Space to submit the answer
Yes, because it was obtained by inducement.(A) The confession is likely to be excluded because it was obtained by inducement. A confession will be excluded if it was obtained by oppression or inducement and if there is a causal link between the oppression or inducement and the confession. Misrepresenting the strength of the prosecution case amounts to inducement to confess. The officers misrepresented the strength of the case by lying about the CCTV footage. This caused the defendant to confess, so the causal link is satisfied. Therefore, the confession is likely to be excluded. (B) is wrong as there was no oppression. Oppression includes torture, inhumane treatment, and the use or threat of violence. (C), (D), and (E) are incorrect as the confession is likely to be excluded.
A defendant is standing trial in the Magistrates’ Court, represented by a solicitor. The defendant is charged with theft of items from a supermarket totalling £10.
In their opening speech, the prosecution explains to the lay bench that the test for dishonesty is whether the defendant was dishonest by the standard of reasonable, honest people and whether the defendant realised he was dishonest by these standards. The defendant’s solicitor knows that the test is in fact only the first, objective, limb. The misstatement of the law by the prosecution is advantageous to the defendant.
What should the defendant’s solicitor do?
The solicitor should tell the court that the prosecution has misstated the law.(A) The solicitor should inform the prosecution and the court of the legal error. Whilst it is disadvantageous to the defendant, the defence solicitor is under a duty to correct this legal error as they have a duty not to mislead the court. (B) is wrong, as the solicitor’s duty to their client does not override their duty to the court. (C) is incorrect, as the defendant has no say on what the solicitor should do. (D) is incorrect, as the solicitor is not professionally embarrassed. (E) is incorrect because the error of law must be corrected to the court; the defence cannot leave it to the prosecution to decide whether they correct the error.
A defendant appears in court charged with robbery of a post office. The only evidence linking the defendant to the offence is the identification evidence of a single witness. The witness saw the robbery taking place from the other side of the street. It was dark at the time of the offence, and the nearest street light was 25 metres away. It was raining at the time, and the suspect was wearing a woolly hat. The witness saw the suspect for around 10 seconds, from a distance of some 20 metres. In their first description, the witness described the suspect as having light skin and light brown hair. At the identification procedure, the witness identified the defendant as being the offender. The defendant has black hair and a Mediterranean complexion. The defendant and the witness are not known to each other.
How should the trial judge deal with the evidence in this case?
ResponsesPress Enter or Space to submit the answer
The judge should withdraw the matter from the jury and dismiss the case.(E) The judge should withdraw the matter from the jury and dismiss the case. When a judge concludes the identification is weak and there is no supporting evidence, they should withdraw the case from the jury and direct acquittal. Here, the witness’s identification is very weak (due to the distance, the lighting, the duration of the view, and the differences between the first identification and the second), and there is no supporting evidence. (A) is incorrect because the matter should not be left to the jury; the judge should withdraw the matter from the jury. (B) is incorrect, as a Turnbull direction is appropriate if there is some corroborating evidence or if the identification evidence is stronger. (C) is incorrect as there is no ‘enhanced’ Turnbull direction. (D) is incorrect as this is a part of the standard Turnbull direction
A man is charged at the police station with murdering his wife. The police remand the man in custody to appear at court.
At which court will the man be produced?
The Magistrates’ Court.(B) The man will be produced at the Magistrates’ Court. All cases, no matter how serious, begin in the Magistrates’ Court. As murder is an indictable only offence, the case will immediately be sent to the Crown Court. All other answers are incorrect, as all offences have their first appearance in the Magistrates’ Court.
A defendant is charged with multiple counts of burglary. It is alleged that he is part of a burglary ring that has been regularly burglarising homes in wealthy neighbourhoods. The case involves many eyewitnesses who claim to have seen the defendant or his fellow burglars. The defendant has no previous convictions and maintains his innocence. He is 20 years old and works a part-time job that pays minimum wage. He has no savings. The defendant does not think he can afford a private barrister, and so he applies for a representation order.
Is the defendant’s application for a representation order likely to be granted?
Yes, because the defendant’s case is serious and he likely has a sufficiently low income.(A) The defendant’s application for a representation order is likely to be granted because the defendant’s case is serious and he likely has a sufficiently low income. A defendant must satisfy two requirements for a representation order to be awarded: the interests of justice test and the means test. One of the factors to be considered under the interests of justice test is whether the defendant is likely to lose their liberty or livelihood. The seriousness and nature of the offence are relevant to this factor, as is the previous good character and standing of the defendant. The prosecution case is taken at its highest in considering the seriousness of the offence. Here, the defendant is facing multiple burglary charges. The sentencing range for one count of domestic burglary goes from a community order to six years in custody, so multiple counts could result in significant prison time. Also, the defendant has no previous convictions. Another factor is whether the case involves tracing witnesses, interviewing them, or cross-examining them. The defendant’s case involves many eyewitnesses, and so this factor is present. The means test is satisfied if the defendant’s annual disposable income is below a certain threshold. Since the defendant has a part-time job that pays minimum wage, it is likely that his income is below the threshold. Therefore, since the interests of justice and means tests are likely satisfied, the defendant’s application is likely to be granted. (B) is incorrect because the means test must be satisfied regardless of the seriousness of the offence charged. (C) is incorrect because the defendant’s case is likely serious. (D) is incorrect because a defendant can be employed and still satisfy the means test. (E) is incorrect because grants of representation are not limited to defendants charged with homicide crimes
A solicitor is representing a defendant charged with criminal damage at trial. The defendant is very nervous about giving evidence, and she asks her solicitor if he can lead her through her account when she is giving evidence so she does not make a mistake.
Can the solicitor ask leading questions during examination-in-chief?
Yes, but only on background and agreed matters.(D) The solicitor can ask leading questions only on background and agreed matters. It is not generally permissible to ask leading questions during examination-in-chief. However, on background matters (like the defendant’s address) and agreed issues, it is permissible to ask leading questions. An advocate can settle a witness into giving evidence by starting them with some of these agreed issues before moving into contentious areas. (B), (C), and (E) are, therefore, incorrect. (A) is also incorrect because the defence is allowed to ask leading questions when cross-examining the prosecution witnesses.
A man reported a domestic burglary to the police. He had an injury to the head, and some expensive artwork was missing from his home. The next day in a bar, the man had too much to drink and admitted to his friend that he faked the burglary himself in order to claim on his insurance. Another customer in the bar also overheard this admission. The man is charged with fraud offences. Both the friend and other customer are ready to give evidence at trial.
Is the man’s admission in the bar admissible?
Yes, as although it is hearsay, it is a confession and therefore admissible.(B) The man’s admission is admissible, despite being hearsay, because it is a confession. Hearsay is a statement made out of court which is adduced to prove the truth of its content. Thus, although the witnesses are coming to court to give evidence, they will be giving evidence about a statement made out of court to prove the truth of its content, and it is therefore hearsay. (A) is therefore incorrect. Hearsay is not generally admissible unless it falls into one of the exceptions to the rule against hearsay. One of the exceptions is confessions. A confession is any statement wholly or partly adverse to the person who made it, whether or not made to a person in authority and whether made in words or otherwise. The man’s statement that he faked the burglary is clearly adverse to him. As this is a confession, it will be admissible, and (E) is therefore incorrect. It is irrelevant to the statement’s admissibility that the man was intoxicated or that it was heard by two witnesses, and so (C) and (D) are incorrect.
A man is arrested on suspicion of theft from a department store. He is interviewed under caution and denies the offence. The matter proceeds to Crown Court trial. The man gives evidence at trial and gives the same account as in police interview, denying the offence. The man has a 20 year record of continuous employment. He is a volunteer at a shelter for the homeless and has no previous convictions.
What should the judge say to the jury about the defendant’s good character?
That a person of good character is less likely to have committed this offence and is more likely to be credible when they assert their innocence in interview or giving evidence at trial.(C) If the defendant has no previous convictions, they are entitled to have the judge give a good character direction to the jury. A good character direction consists of two parts: the propensity direction and the credibility direction. The propensity direction is that a person of good character is less likely to have committed this offence. The credibility direction is that a person of good character is more likely to be credible where they assert their innocence either before or during trial. (A) is incorrect as it includes only the propensity direction and because whether the offence involves dishonesty is irrelevant. (B) is incorrect as it includes only the credibility direction and because the direction should include assertions of innocence at trial. (D) is incorrect because the judge should state that a person of good character is less likely to have committed the offence and not refer to the propensity to commit the offence. Also, the person is considered more likely to be ‘credible’ rather than ‘truthful’. (E) is incorrect because the need to commit the offence should not be mentioned, and the credibility direction should refer to the defendant asserting their innocence.QUESTION ID: CRP027
A suspect is being interviewed by the police on suspicion of robbery. A solicitor is present and has intervened multiple times during the interview. First, the solicitor stopped the interview for further time for advice when the interviewing officer introduced new information during the interview. Next, the solicitor intervened to seek clarification on the evidence collected. Then, the solicitor intervened to challenge the manner of questioning. The interviewing officer now wants to expel the solicitor from the interview for improper interference in its conduct.
Can the interviewing officer exclude the solicitor?
No, because the solicitor’s actions do not amount to obstruction and, in any case, permission of a superintendent would be required.(D) A solicitor can be excluded only if they are obstructing the interview and only if removal is authorised by a superintendent. Obstruction includes answering for the client or telling the client what to say. Intervening to advise the client when new information is presented, to seek clarification of how evidence was collected, or to challenge the method of questioning, all are valid and permissible under PACE, so there are no legitimate grounds for removal of the solicitor. Moreover, even if there were valid grounds for removal, PACE requires that the removal be authorised by a superintendent. (A) is incorrect because it is too broad-a solicitor may be removed for obstruction. (B) is incorrect because obstruction is not made out merely because a solicitor intervenes three times. (C) has the correct result but for an incorrect reason-a custody officer may not remove a solicitor (and removal requires obstruction in any event). (E) is incorrect, as the solicitor does not need to commit any offence themselves to be subject to exclusion and the interviewing officer does not have the power to remove a solicitor in any event.
Question
A 15-year-old child is convicted after trial in the Youth Court of battery upon another teenager. The 15-year-old has no previous convictions.
Which of the following best describes the court’s power to make a referral order?
The court cannot impose a referral order, as the 15-year-old was convicted after trial.(E) The court cannot impose a referral order on the 15-year-old. Referral orders are not available when a defendant has pleaded not guilty to all charges and is convicted after trial. If a defendant pleads guilty to an imprisonable offence and it is their first offence, the court must impose a referral order. Here, there was no guilty plea, so (A) is incorrect. If the defendant pleads guilty to some offences but not guilty to others, a referral order may be imposed. Likewise, if the defendant has previous convictions, a referral order may be imposed. Here, the defendant does not have any previous convictions and has not pleaded guilty to any offences, so (B) and (C) are incorrect. Referral orders are available to all defendants aged 10-17, so (D) is incorrect. QUESTION ID: CRP005
A defendant is charged with section 20 grievous bodily harm (‘s20 GBH’) after hitting a person with a cricket bat.
Where will the defendant’s case be tried?
Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on whether the Magistrates’ Court accepts jurisdiction and where the defendant elects trial.(B) Section 20 GBH is an either way offence which can be tried in either the Magistrates’ or Crown Court, depending on whether the Magistrates’ Court accepts jurisdiction and, if so, what the defendant would prefer. (A) is wrong as s20 GBH is not indictable only. (However, note that s18 GBH, which has a more serious mens rea, is indictable only.) (C) and (D) are wrong as both the court’s acceptance of jurisdiction and the defendant’s preference are determinative. (E) is wrong as s20 GBH is not summary only; it is either way.
Three brothers, aged 10, 13, and 15, commit an aggravated robbery together. Following conviction in the Youth Court, they all appear before court for sentence. None of the brothers has a previous conviction. The court agrees that the custody threshold has been passed and that a custodial sentence is merited.
Which of the three brothers can receive a detention and training order?
The 15-year-old only.(A) Only the 15-year-old can receive a detention and training order. A detention and training order is the custodial sentence available to the Youth Court. It is not available for defendants aged 10 and 11, so (C) and (D) are incorrect. For defendants aged 12 to 14, it is available only for persistent young offenders. A persistent young offender is a defendant who has been sentenced on three occasions for an offence punishable by imprisonment. As none of the brothers has a previous conviction, the 13-year-old cannot receive a detention and training order, and (B) is incorrect. For defendants aged 15 to 17, the order can be imposed on any offender as long as the court is of the opinion that the case is so serious that only a custodial sentence is justified. As long as the court takes this view, the 15-year-old can receive a detention and training order, and so (E) is incorrect.QUESTION ID: CRP004
