Criminal Law: Classification of Offences

Study Notes

Criminal offences are categorized into three types: summary, either-way, and indictable only.
The classification determines the procedures used to process a case within the criminal justice system.

These are less serious offences that are handled solely in the Magistrates' Courts.
This applies whether the defendant pleads guilty or not guilty.
An example of a summary offense is common assault, defined in Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

These offences are more serious than summary offenses and can be tried in either the Magistrates’ Court or the Crown Court.
The trial venue depends on the defendant's plea.
A guilty plea means the case remains in the Magistrates’ Court, where sentencing occurs.
The case can be referred to the Crown Court for sentencing if the Magistrates’ Court lacks sufficient sentencing power.
If the defendant pleads not guilty, the Magistrates' Court determines if they have sufficient sentencing power.
If they do, the case remains in the Magistrates’ Court.
If sentencing is outside their jurisdiction, it is transferred to the Crown Court via a committal hearing.
An example of an either-way offense is theft, as outlined in Section 1 of the Theft Act 1968.

These represent the most serious crimes and are tried exclusively in the Crown Court by a judge and jury.
The defendant initially appears in the Magistrates' Court where the case is then sent to the Crown Court for trial.
If multiple offenses are involved, the most serious offense dictates the process used.
An example of an indictable only offense is the common law offence of murder.

The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law.
It obligates all criminal courts to interpret legislation consistently with the ECHR.
If legislation is incompatible, the Courts of Appeal or the House of Lords must declare incompatibility.
Parliament then decides whether to amend the legislation.

Article 3 - Prohibition of Torture: This article can be relevant when evidence of police misconduct towards the client emerges during investigation, questioning, raids, or detention at the police station.
Article 5 - Right to Liberty and Security: This right can be used to challenge the police or court's refusal of bail for the client.
Article 6 - Right to a Fair Trial: This is arguably the most significant convention right, as it applies at all stages of the criminal process, including police stations, rules of evidence at trial, and the client's sentencing.

The ECHR also embodies general legal principles, including the rule of law.
The rule of law states that any state deviation from convention law must be based on readily accessible laws and regulations, not arbitrary decisions.
Any interference with an ECHR right must have a legitimate aim and adhere to the principle of proportionality.
Proportionality requires that the interference is necessary in a democratic society or based on a pressing social need.

These rules came into effect on April 4, 2005, to ensure fair and just handling of all criminal cases.
Everyone involved in the criminal justice process is expected to conduct cases in accordance with these rules.
Courts are obligated to manage cases thoroughly, identifying issues early to prevent delays.

The client can waive legal professional privilege in a trial if there is a risk of adverse inferences being drawn.
This is based on Section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
If the solicitor is asked for reasons for advising the client to remain silent during an interview, the privilege can be waived.

A solicitor cannot act for two or more clients if a conflict of interest exists between them.
This is particularly important when representing co-defendants, as outlined in Rule 3, paragraphs 24-36.

A solicitor cannot influence a witness or persuade them to alter their evidence.
A defense solicitor can interview a prosecution witness and vice versa.
However, a lawyer from the respective team must be present during the interview.