Unit 15 Crown Court Appeals Flashcards
Is appeal by way of case stated available to Crown Court decisions?
Yes, once proceedings in the Crown Court are finally decided. However, no appeal by way of case stated is possible in respect of matters relating to trial on indictment.
Is Judicial Review available to Crown Court decisions?
It is possible to challenge a decision of the Crown Court by way of judicial review provided that that decision does not concern a matter relating to trial on indictment.
What does “a matter relating to trial on indictment” include?
Covers all decisions relating to the conduct of the trial:
• the decision to stay any part of an indictment as an abuse of process is a matter relating to trial on indictment,
• as is an order that counts should lie on the file in the usual way,
• a decision as to the order in which indictments are tried and decisions as to disclosure
• It has also been held that the decision to hold a trial on the issue of fitness to plead is a matter relating to trial on indictment
• as is the imposition of a mandatory life sentence
(Not available for JR or case stated review)
What matters do not relate to trial on indictment?
Matters which do not relate to trial on indictment include forfeiture of a surety, forfeiture of property used in the course of an offence belonging to a third party, binding over of an acquitted accused and restrictions on the publication of the identity of a convicted youth.
Can Bail be granted pending a decision of Judicial Review?
Yes.
If an accused appeals from the Mags, to the Crown, what is their next option?
If a defendant convicted in the magistrates’ court appeals to the Crown Court, any further appeal to the High Court on a point of law should be by way of case stated and not judicial review.
Who can vary or rescind a Crown Court Sentence (within the following 56 days, not by appeal)?
The judge who makes the variation must be the judge who originally passed sentence; if, however, the judge was accompanied by justices on the first occasion, they need not be present for the variation
How is the crown court able to vary its sentence?
It is not limited to varying the length, but also it can vary the type. E.g. exchange prison for a hospital order if diagnoses becomes apparent. The Court may use the power to impose either a more punitive or more lenient sentence and to correct a sentence that is, on reflection, considered to have been wrong in principle.
Where do most of the Crown Court Appeals against sentence and conviction go?
The Court of Appeal
How many judges must be available to hear an appeal in the Court of Appeal?
A court consisting of an uneven number of judges no fewer than three is required to determine an appeal. Ordinarily, a court sitting to deal with any of the above hearings will comprise just three judges. But, exceptionally, five or even seven judges will sit when the matter to be decided is very important and would benefit from the authority of such a court or where there have been conflicting decisions of the Court of Appeal on the same point.
Can an appeal be dealt with by 2 judges at the CoA?
Yes but only if the case is NOT either of the following:
a. an appeal against conviction,
b. a review of a sentence
c. an appeal against a finding of unfitness to plead, that a person is under a disability,
d. an application for leave to appeal a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity or a finding under s. 4 of the 1964 Act which has not previously been refused by a single judge, and
e. an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Does an accused require permission to appeal against conviction on indictment?
Yes. An appeal under this section lies only—
a. with the leave of the Court of Appeal; or
b. if, within 28 days of the date of the conviction, the judge of the court of trial grants a certificate that the case is fit for appeal.
Unless the trial judge certifies that a case is fit for appeal, leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal is required. Such a certificate of fitness to appeal against conviction or sentence should be issued only in exceptional circumstances. The certificate removes the need for leave to appeal to be granted by the Court of Appeal but it does not commence the appeal; advocates still need to follow the procedure
Will the wrongful exclusion of admissible evidence render a conviction unsafe?
The wrongful exclusion of admissible evidence or wrongful inclusion of inadmissible evidence will lead to the quashing of a conviction if the error means that the conviction is unsafe. That remains true even if the appellant’s advocate failed to object to the admission of the evidence when it was adduced. But the fact that the advocate did not object to the evidence will be a factor in determining whether its admission was sufficiently prejudicial to render the conviction unsafe.
Will the wrongful rejection of a submission of no case to answer leave a conviction unsafe?
The wrongful rejection of a submission of no case to answer at the close of the prosecution case will lead to the conclusion that a conviction is unsafe. That can be so even when the appellant has given evidence and admitted guilt in cross-examination. The failure of an experienced advocate to make a submission of no case will not preclude the quashing of a conviction on the basis that there was in fact no case to answer, but the Court of Appeal will presume that the advocate had reason to not make the submission and will look at the whole of the evidence in making its decision. The Court will not ordinarily interfere if a submission would have succeeded but was not made, and evidence of guilt emerged later in the trial.
What impact can a defective indictment have on conviction?
• Where the indictment charges an offence not known to law, the conviction will be quashed even if the accused pled guilty.
• Where the indictment is preferred and signed without jurisdiction, the proceedings will be a nullity.
• Where an indictment is duplicitous, a conviction may be quashed if the duplicity results in the conviction being unsafe. That is so whether objection was taken at trial or not.
When counts are improperly joined or included in an indictment the conviction may be quashed.
Can the Court of Appeal quash a conviction based on jury irregularities?
The Court of Appeal will quash a conviction based on apparently inconsistent verdicts only if those verdicts are such that no reasonable jury applying its mind to the evidence could have reached the conclusions that it did. They will also consider incorrect jury majorities.
Can conduct of the judge be a ground of appeal from the crown court?
Yes. The Court observed that the safety of a conviction does not simply depend on the strength of evidence the jury hears, but also on the observance of due process.
Can errors in summing up constitute a ground of appeal?
Yes, plainly, errors in the summing-up may found a successful appeal against conviction if the error leads to the conclusion that the conviction is unsafe.
Will a misdirection of the law in summing up lead to a quashing of conviction?
A misdirection as to law will lead to the quashing of a conviction only if that misdirection causes the conviction to be unsafe. (for example misdirecting the importance of the use of force to distinguish robbery from theft),
Can the wrongful withdrawal of a question of fact from the jury lead to a quashed conviction?
‘When we once arrive at the conclusion that a vital question of fact has not been left to the jury, the only ground on which we can affirm a conviction is that there has been no miscarriage of justice, on the ground that if the question had been left to the jury, they must necessarily have come to the conclusion that the appellant was guilty’. Thus, if a judge fails to direct a jury as to an issue of fact going to an element of the offence, the conviction may be quashed if it is, as a result, unsafe.
Will a misdirection of fact in summing up lead to a conviction being quashed?
A misstatement or omission of a fact in the course of the summing-up may lead to the quashing of a conviction if the fact was of such importance that, if it had been correctly stated, the jury may not have reached the same verdict.
