Criminal Litigation Notes

The City Law School - Criminal Litigation - Allocation SA4

Objectives of Allocation SA4

  • Understand and apply concepts and rules in SA4, with emphasis on bullets 2-4.
  • Statute numbers are for reference; memorization is not necessary.

Procedure for Entering a Not Guilty Plea

  • Edward's Entry into Court:

    • Edward enters the court and is identified by the court officer.
    • Charges are written down (if not already done).
    • Charges are read aloud to Edward.

  • Allocation Process:

    • The court moves to the Allocation stage due to an either-way offence (e.g., dangerous driving).
    • Summary offences are disregarded during Allocation for either-way offences.

  • Plea Before Venue (PBV) Stage:

    • Two-stage allocation procedure explained by court officer.
    • Dangerous driving charge is read to Edward, who indicates his plea (either guilty or not guilty).
    • Edward enters a not guilty (NG) plea.

  • Second Stage of Allocation:

    • With an NG plea, the court determines the appropriate trial venue.
    • Default assumption: if no plea indicated, it’s treated as an NG plea.

Principles for Determining Trial Venue

  • Primary Consideration:

    • Assess if magistrates’ court sentencing powers are adequate.
    • Consider the totality of offending when multiple offences are present.

  • Allocation Guidelines:

    • Either-way offences generally tried summarily unless:
    • A sentence exceeding magistrates’ powers is likely.
    • The case has significant legal, procedural, or factual complexity.

  • Magistrates' Court:

    • If unsure, offer summary trial option.
    • Maximum penalty on summary conviction for one either-way offence is 6 months' imprisonment and/or fine; aggregate for multiple offences is 12 months and/or fine.

Stages of Allocation

  • Stage 1: Plea Before Venue

    • Defendants and parties may make representations regarding venue suitability.
    • Prosecution presents first, including any pertinent previous convictions.

  • Stage 2: Determining Trial Venue

    • Defence presents second, often influenced by prosecution arguments.
    • If prosecution favors Crown Court, defence may argue for magistrates' court.
    • Court must consider sentencing guidelines before making a decision.

Court's Decision After Representation

  • Summary Trial Suitability:

    • If deemed suitable, court explains options:
    • Edward can consent to summary trial or elect Crown Court trial.
    • If he consents to summary trial and pleads guilty, the court may provide an indication of sentence.

  • Indication of Sentence:

    • Court can indicate if the sentence will be custodial or non-custodial but is under no obligation.
    • If indicated and plea changes, PBV is repeated.

Choice of Venue for Trial

  • Trial Options:

    • If summary trial is unsuitable, Edward is sent to Crown Court with no choice.
    • If suitable, Edward can choose between consenting to summary trial or electing Crown Court.

  • Joint Trial Principle:

    • For co-accused, if one is sent for trial, others may be as well (principle of ‘one up, all up’).

Advantages of Magistrates' Court Trial

  • Shorter timeframes, less formality, and lower costs.

Disadvantages of Magistrates' Court Trial

  • Separation of tribunal of law and facts may complicate the trial.
  • Specific procedures require service of papers and defence statements akin to Crown Court.

Procedure for a Guilty Plea

  • If Edward enters a guilty plea, magistrates decide on sentencing or commitments based on their powers.

Failure to Attend Allocation

  • Defendant needs to be present for both stages unless a legal representative can represent them.
  • The court can proceed with absence under certain conditions (e.g., disorderly conduct, good reason).

Case Studies on Offences

  • Criminal Damage:

    • Defined as an either-way offence but triable summarily if financial damage doesn’t exceed £5,000.
    • Considerations include cost of repair or replacement for determining value.

  • Low-Value Shoplifting (Zara's Case):

    • Defined by a value threshold (under £200) with conditions for trial in magistrates' or Crown Court.

  • Recent Cases on Low-Value Shoplifting:

    • McDermott-Mullane [2017]: Low-value shoplifting cannot be the sole count on an indictment unless the defendant elects Crown Court trial.
    • Maxwell [2018]: Low-value shoplifting charges cannot aggregate with ordinary shoplifting offences unless election is made.
    • Burrows [2019]: Low-value charges on indictment only if the accused has elected Crown Court trial.