Case Summaries Up To October 2009
Select Your Region: Scotland  England and Wales  UK  Northern Ireland  Europe  All
Selected Region: All
By Euan A. Dow on 28/10/2009 16:18
Criminal petition under section 272(1) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 :- The respondent appeared on indictment at a preliminary hearing in respect of twenty charges including eighteen charges of either of fraud or theft in which it is alleged that the respondent obtained entry to the home of an elderly person by means of deceit. Here the Crown sought by way of a petition in terms of Section 272(1) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 to take the evidence of five witnesses ...
By Euan A. Dow on 08/10/2009 08:37
Admissibility of Police Interview:- The Accused has been indicted on a charge of culpable homicide involving the administration of heroin to Ross Brown, and three charges of supplying controlled drugs contrary to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. A trial has been set down for November 2009 and here the court considered the admissibility of statements made by the Accused to police officers under tape recorded conditions following his detention. The objection to the admissibilty of the Accused's polic ...
By Law Brief Publishing on 10/09/2009 15:15
An offender who had made an unqualified guilty plea to a charge of conspiracy to supply Class A drugs and had declined to challenge the facts by way of a Newton hearing was entitled to challenge the prosecution evidence at the confiscation proceedings.
By Euan A. Dow on 02/09/2009 15:02
Preliminary Issue:- The first accused lodged a minute objecting to the admissibility of certain surveillance evidence. The evidence arose from observations of individuals carried out by police officers under the terms of Crown production 42 an authorisation of directed surveillance granted by a police superintendent in terms of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Scotland) Act 2000. At this evidential hearing the objection proceeded by way of a "trial within a trial". The issue raised on beh ...
By Law Brief Publishing on 19/08/2009 14:13
Parties to ancillary relief proceedings were not entitled to invoke the privilege against self-incrimination in order to withhold the disclosure of financial information and such information was to be treated as being obtained under compulsion and would be inadmissible as evidence for the purpose of other proceedings, but statements made in "without prejudice" discussions were admissible in subsequent criminal proceedings.
By Law Brief Publishing on 18/08/2009 14:14
The appropriate remedy for abuse of confiscation proceedings would normally be a stay of proceedings, but an abuse of process argument could not be founded on the basis that the consequences of the proper application of the legislative structure could produce an "oppressive" result.
By Law Brief Publishing on 06/08/2009 14:28
An offender's previous convictions for robbery, and the escalation in seriousness of each offence, meant that a judge had properly considered the issue of dangerousness and been entitled to impose a sentence of imprisonment for public protection.
By Law Brief Publishing on 30/07/2009 14:15
The Court of Appeal Criminal Division held that where the Crown proceeded on an indictment which all parties, including the judge, thought had been validly amended but which, by an oversight, had not, the proceedings on which the indictment was based were a nullity and any conviction arising from them had to be quashed.
By Law Brief Publishing on 22/07/2009 14:16
The fact that the arrest in hospital of a person suspected of driving while over the legal alcohol limit was unlawful by virtue of the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.6D(3) did not mean that a subsequent blood test was unlawful.
By Law Brief Publishing on 01/07/2009 13:20
A conviction for aggravated burglary was unsafe where the judge had admitted evidence of the accused's co-defendants' pleas of guilty to aggravated burglary under the Theft Act 1968 s.9(1)(b) when the accused was charged with aggravated burglary under s.9(1)(a) of the Act, and had failed to provide the jury with the bases of the pleas, so that the pleas had no probative value to the crucial issue against the accused of whether he was armed.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...
 
This content is made available by CaseCheck Limited under a Creative Commons Licence  |  Terms Of Use