Summary trial procedure. Submission of no case to answer Flashcards
Submission of No Case to Answer
Under CrimPR 24.3(3)(d) the magistrates may acquit the accused on the ground that the prosecution evidence is insufficient for any reasonable court properly to convict. They may do so following an application by the defence or on their own initiative but, in either case, the prosecutor must be given an opportunity to make representations. Thus, at the close of the prosecution evidence, the defence may submit that there is no case to answer.
Rule 24.3(3)(d) sets out the basis for the decision, namely that no reasonable court could properly convict. Thus, the decision depends not on whether the justices would at that stage convict or acquit but on whether the evidence is such that a reasonable tribunal might convict. If a reasonable tribunal might convict on the evidence so far laid before it, there is a case to answer. The submission should therefore succeed if a conviction would be perverse, in the sense that no reasonable bench could convict.
In DPP v LB the Divisional Court emphasised the importance of the prosecutor’s right to make representations if a submission of no case to answer is made.
There is no obligation on justices to give reasons for rejecting a submission of no case to answer.
Credibility of Prosecution Witnesses
An important issue is the extent to which justices may have regard to the credibility of prosecution witnesses when considering a submission of no case to answer. In the Crown Court, the test to be applied by the judge when ruling on a submission of no case (set out in Galbraith is whether the prosecution evidence is so tenuous that, even taken at its highest, a jury properly directed could not properly convict on it. The requirement that the Crown Court judge should ‘take the prosecution evidence at its highest’ is intended to leave questions of credibility to the jury.
In Barking and Dagenham Justices, ex parte DPP the Divisional Court said that questions of credibility should, except in the clearest of cases, not normally be taken into account by justices considering a submission of no case.
Nonetheless, it is submitted that some justices may well take the pragmatic view that it would be inappropriate for them to go through the motions of hearing defence evidence if they have already formed the view that the prosecution evidence is so unconvincing that they will not be able to convict on it in any event. However, the general principle remains that, so long as the necessary minimum amount of prosecution evidence has been adduced so as to raise a case on which a reasonable tribunal could convict, the justices should allow the trial to run its course rather than acquitting on a submission.
Prosecution Right of Reply
When the justices are provisionally minded to uphold the submission of no case to answer, they should first call on the prosecution to address them. so that the prosecutor has an opportunity to address the court to show why the case should not be dismissed. This means that the prosecution have the right to reply to the defence submission that there is no case to answer unless, having heard the defence submission, the magistrates decide to rule that there is a case to answer and indicate this fact to the prosecutor.
