Criminal Litigation SAQ Mock 1

Card Set Information

Author:
billsykes
ID:
210249
Filename:
Criminal Litigation SAQ Mock 1
Updated:
2013-03-29 18:08:52
Tags:
Criminal Litigation
Folders:

Description:
Criminal Litigation
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user billsykes on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Jenny Quinn (aged 28) is employed as a care worker by the local council. One of the clientsshe regularly visits to cook and clean for is Mrs May Welsh (aged 82). Mrs Welsh, a widow,lives alone in her terraced house. On the night of 3 April, whilst Mrs Welsh was asleep inbed, she became aware of someone in the house. She went downstairs to investigate andsaw a woman she believed to be Jenny Quinn standing in the hall. The woman ran out of theopen front door of the house into a car which was waiting outside. With her she took ajewellery case which contained, among other items, Mrs Welsh’s engagement ring. None ofthe jewellery, which together is valued at under £1,000, has been recovered. It is theProsecution case that, whilst working for Mrs Welsh, Jenny took her front door key and had itcopied so that she could gain access to the house at a later date. The Prosecution says thaton the night of the burglary she entered the house alone, but that she had been driven to thehouse by an accomplice (who has never been caught). Jenny was arrested the day after the offence and charged with burglary (an either-wayoffence). She has a previous conviction for a domestic burglary three years ago for whichshe received a community order. The case is listed for a plea before venue and mode of trial hearing in the Magistrates’ Court.

    (a)  If Jenny indicates a plea of not guilty at the plea before venue and mode of trialhearing, what aggravating features of the offence will the Magistrates take intoaccount when deciding whether or not they should accept jurisdiction? (3 marks)
    (a)       The following aggravating features indicate a higher thanusual level of culpability/degree of harm. Students should be awarded 1 markfor any relevant aggravating feature up to a maximum of 3 marks.

    • ·     Planning.
    • ·     Professionalism.
    • ·     [Targeting] vulnerable victim.
    • ·     Breach of trust.
    • ·     Premises occupied.
    • ·     Property taken of sentimental value.
    • ·     Allow credit for any other aggravating features advanced (up to the maximum)

    Note –previous conviction not an aggravating feature for these purposes See: SGC Guideline on Overarching Principles: Offence Seriousness; the Magistrates’ Courts Sentencing Guideline on domestic burglary; and R v Saw [2009] 2 AllER1138. Blackstone’s, B4.56-59
  2. Jenny Quinn (aged 28) is employed as a care worker by the local council. One of the clients she regularly visits to cook and clean for is Mrs May Welsh (aged 82). Mrs Welsh, a widow,lives alone in her terraced house. On the night of 3 April, whilst Mrs Welsh was asleep in bed, she became aware of someone in the house. She went downstairs to investigate and saw a woman she believed to be Jenny Quinn standing in the hall. The woman ran out of the open front door of the house into a car which was waiting outside. With her she took a jewellery case which contained, among other items, Mrs Welsh’s engagement ring. None of the jewellery, which together is valued at under £1,000, has been recovered. It is the Prosecution case that, whilst working for Mrs Welsh, Jenny took her front door key and had it copied so that she could gain access to the house at a later date. The Prosecution says that on the night of the burglary she entered the house alone, but that she had been driven to the house by an accomplice (who has never been caught). Jenny was arrested the day after the offence and charged with burglary (an either-way offence). She has a previous conviction for a domestic burglary three years ago for which she received a community order. The case is listed for a plea before venue and mode of trial hearing in the Magistrates’ Court.

    (b)  If Jenny indicates a plea of guilty at the plea before venue hearing, what will be the
    effect of that indication, and what is the procedure that the Magistrates are then likely
    to adopt in relation to the burglary offence? Give reasons for your answer.

    (3 marks)
    ·     As a result of the indication Jenny will stand convicted of the offence (MCA 1980, s.17A(6). [1 mark]

    ·     The Court will consider whether to sentence her or to commit her for sentence under s.3 PCC(S)A 2000 (MCA 1980, s.17A(4)). [1 mark]

    ·     They are likely to commit her for sentence havingheard from the Prosecution and Defence advocates in the light of theaggravating features and the previous conviction for burglary. [1mark]

    Blackstone’sD6.8
  3. Jenny Quinn (aged 28) is employed as a care worker by the local council. One of the clients she regularly visits to cook and clean for is Mrs May Welsh (aged 82). Mrs Welsh, a widow,lives alone in her terraced house. On the night of 3 April, whilst Mrs Welsh was asleep in bed, she became aware of someone in the house. She went downstairs to investigate and saw a woman she believed to be Jenny Quinn standing in the hall. The woman ran out of the open front door of the house into a car which was waiting outside. With her she took a jewellery case which contained, among other items, Mrs Welsh’s engagement ring. None of the jewellery, which together is valued at under £1,000, has been recovered. It is the Prosecution case that, whilst working for Mrs Welsh, Jenny took her front door key and had it copied so that she could gain access to the house at a later date. The Prosecution says that on the night of the burglary she entered the house alone, but that she had been driven to the house by an accomplice (who has never been caught). Jenny was arrested the day after the offence and charged with burglary (an either-way offence). She has a previous conviction for a domestic burglary three years ago for which she received a community order. The case is listed for a plea before venue and mode of trial hearing in the Magistrates’ Court.

    In fact Jenny decides to indicate a plea of not guilty in the Magistrates’ Court. Her case
    proceeds for trial in the Crown Court. You are defending Jenny in the Crown Court and she
    is running a defence of alibi. You will be calling Jenny to give evidence and you will also be calling her mother as an alibi witness.

    (c) Before calling any evidence on behalf of the Defence are you entitled to make an opening speech? Give reasons for your answer.

    (2 marks)
    ·     Yes. [1 mark]

    ·     The Defence is entitled to make an opening speech ifcalling a witness as to fact in addition to the Defendant: Blackstone’s D16.7. [1 mark]
  4. Jenny Quinn (aged 28) is employed as a care worker by the local council. One of the clients she regularly visits to cook and clean for is Mrs May Welsh (aged 82). Mrs Welsh, a widow,lives alone in her terraced house. On the night of 3 April, whilst Mrs Welsh was asleep in bed, she became aware of someone in the house. She went downstairs to investigate and saw a woman she believed to be Jenny Quinn standing in the hall. The woman ran out of the open front door of the house into a car which was waiting outside. With her she took a jewellery case which contained, among other items, Mrs Welsh’s engagement ring. None of the jewellery, which together is valued at under £1,000, has been recovered. It is the Prosecution case that, whilst working for Mrs Welsh, Jenny took her front door key and had it copied so that she could gain access to the house at a later date. The Prosecution says that on the night of the burglary she entered the house alone, but that she had been driven to the house by an accomplice (who has never been caught). Jenny was arrested the day after the offence and charged with burglary (an either-way offence). She has a previous conviction for a domestic burglary three years ago for which she received a community order. The case is listed for a plea before venue and mode of trial hearing in the Magistrates’ Court.

    After the closing speeches the Judge adjourns the case overnight with a view to starting his
    summing-up in the morning. In the meantime Jenny is granted bail. When the Court
    reconvenes in the morning, Jenny fails to appear. Enquiries reveal that she rang her father after the case was adjourned and told him she thought the proceedings were a farce and that she wasn’t going to bother to turn up for the verdict.

    Is the Judge likely to proceed with the case in her absence? Give reasons for your answer.

    (2 marks)
    ·     The Judge can proceed in her absence – it is a matterfor his discretion. [1 mark]. Alternatively he can issue a warrant for her arrest [1mark] – only 1 mark available here.

    ·     He is likely to proceed in her absence since she has voluntarily absented herself and the defence case has been fully presented (R v Hayward [2001] QB 862). [1 mark] Blackstone’s, D14.84
  5. Jim and Colin are due to be tried for causing grievous bodily harm with intent, to Peter. Petermade a witness statement to the police about what had happened to him in which hedescribed being attacked by Jim and Colin after leaving the Gladbury Arms Public House.Jim and Colin deny being at the pub that night.

    Unfortunately, Peter dies before the trial (of causes not attributable to the injuries that had been inflicted upon him). The Prosecution wishes to read Peter’s statement at trial. The Prosecution also wishes to adduce a document taken from the local taxi company, on the evening in question. The document is created by the operator who allocates jobs and records the jobs of each taxi-driver that evening. It records the fact that Jim ordered a taxi from the Gladbury Arms Public House shortly before the incident.

    (a) Is Peter’s statement hearsay evidence? Give a definition for hearsay evidence when explaining your answer.
    Peter’s statement is hearsay evidence. It is a statement (1 mark) made otherwise than in the course of the proceedings (1mark) intended by the maker (Peter) to cause another person to believe the matters stated within it (1 mark) and used by Counsel for the Prosecution to prove the truth of those matters (1 mark).
  6. Jim and Colin are due to be tried for causing grievous bodily harm with intent, to Peter. Peter made a witness statement to the police about what had happened to him in which he described being attacked by Jim and Colin after leaving the Gladbury Arms Public House. Jim and Colin deny being at the pub that night.

    Unfortunately, Peter dies before the trial (of causes not attributable to the injuries that had been inflicted upon him). The Prosecution wishes to read Peter’s statement at trial. The Prosecution also wishes to adduce a document taken from the local taxi company, on the evening in question. The document is created by the operator who allocates jobs and records the jobs of each taxi-driver that evening. It records the fact that Jim ordered a taxi from the Gladbury Arms Public House shortly before the incident.

    (b) Can Peter’s statement be read at trial? Justify your answer. (4 marks)
    Had Peter been available to attend Court he could have given oral evidence in the proceedings (1 mark). Peter (the maker of the statement) is identified to the Court’s satisfaction (1 mark) and is unavailable to attend Court because he is dead (1 mark). Peter’s statement passes the threshold for admissibility (1 mark) under s.116 of the CriminalJustice Act 2003.
  7. Jim and Colin are due to be tried for causing grievous bodily harm with intent, to Peter. Peter made a witness statement to the police about what had happened to him in which he described being attacked by Jim and Colin after leaving the Gladbury Arms Public House. Jim and Colin deny being at the pub that night.

    Unfortunately, Peter dies before the trial (of causes not attributable to the injuries that had been inflicted upon him). The Prosecution wishes to read Peter’s statement at trial. The Prosecution also wishes to adduce a document taken from the local taxi company, on the evening in question. The document is created by the operator who allocates jobs and records the jobs of each taxi-driver that evening. It records the fact that Jim ordered a taxi from the Gladbury Arms Public House shortly before the incident.

    (c) Can the telephone operator’s record be admitted at trial and if so, how? (2 marks)
    The telephone operator’s record could be admitted as an exception to the rule against hearsay which allows for the admission of documents created or received in the course of a trade, business,profession or other occupation (1 mark). The record was not prepared for the purposes of pending or contemplated criminal proceedings, or for a criminal investigation, and therefore the conditions in CJA 2003 s. 116(2) do not need to be satisfied (1 mark) nor does it need to be shown that the telephone operator could not reasonably be expected to have any recollection of the matters dealt with in the record (s. 117(5)(b)) (1 mark). There is no requirement to show that the telephone operator is unavailable.
  8. Jonny and Terry are charged with burglary and are due to appear before the Crown Court for trial. They are alleged to have committed a burglary at 29 Spindrift Avenue on the evening of21 October 2010. The occupants of the premises, Mr and Mrs Parmer, had been out for an early dinner that evening and returned home as Jonny and Terry were leaving the premises via the front door.

    Mr and Mrs Parmer saw two men come out of their front door and run off down the road carrying some bags. They saw both men for a few seconds from a distance of about 15 feet and recognised them as two men who had visited the house three days previously asking if the Parmers needed any work done on their house.

    Mrs Parmer called the police and two officers arrived within minutes in a marked police vehicle. Having obtained a description from Mrs Parmer, the police officers asked her to accompany them on a drive round the local area to see if she could spot the two men. Mr Parmer remained at the property. Within a few minutes Mrs Parmer pointed two men out to the officers. The two men were arrested and Mrs Parmer was returned back home.

    In her witness statement, Mrs Parmer described man one as between 5 feet 6 inches and 5feet 8 inches tall, white, black curly hair, a black moustache, wearing a grey tracksuit and agold chain. Man two was between 5 feet 8 inches and 5 feet 10 inches tall, white, bald, and wearing a green tracksuit. Mr Parmer provided the same description of man one but could only remember that man two was white and bald.

    Mr Parmer was asked to attend a formal identification procedure at the police station the following day. He was able to identify Jonny (man one) but not Terry (man two). Mrs Parmer was not asked to attend any identification procedure at the police station.

    Both Defendants say that whilst they had offered their services to householders in the area, they were not at the premises at the given time and that the Parmers are mistaken in their identifications.

    (a)  Should the police have invited Mrs Parmer to attend a formal identification procedure? Give reasons for your answer.

    (2 marks)
    ·     Yes. Code D Para. 3.12 provides that formal identification procedures should be followed provided the procedures would be practicable and serve a useful purpose (1 mark).

    ·     Here, it would still serve a useful purpose to hold a formal identification procedure because it would test Mrs Parmer’s ability to make an identification under controlled conditions and either bolster or weaken the identification evidence she is able to give (1 mark).
  9. Jonny and Terry are charged with burglary and are due to appear before the Crown Court for trial. They are alleged to have committed a burglary at 29 Spindrift Avenue on the evening of21 October 2010. The occupants of the premises, Mr and Mrs Parmer, had been out for an early dinner that evening and returned home as Jonny and Terry were leaving the premises via the front door. Mr and Mrs Parmer saw two men come out of their front door and run off down the road carrying some bags. They saw both men for a few seconds from a distance of about 15 feet and recognised them as two men who had visited the house three days previously asking if the Parmers needed any work done on their house. Mrs Parmer called the police and two officers arrived within minutes in a marked police vehicle. Having obtained a description from Mrs Parmer, the police officers asked her to accompany them on a drive round the local area to see if she could spot the two men. Mr Parmer remained at the property. Within a few minutes Mrs Parmer pointed two men out to the officers. The two men were arrested and Mrs Parmer was returned back home. In her witness statement, Mrs Parmer described man one as between 5 feet 6 inches and 5feet 8 inches tall, white, black curly hair, a black moustache, wearing a grey tracksuit and agold chain. Man two was between 5 feet 8 inches and 5 feet 10 inches tall, white, bald, and wearing a green tracksuit. Mr Parmer provided the same description of man one but could only remember that man two was white and bald. Mr Parmer was asked to attend a formal identification procedure at the police station the following day. He was able to identify Jonny (man one) but not Terry (man two). Mrs Parmer was not asked to attend any identification procedure at the police station. Both Defendants say that whilst they had offered their services to householders in the area, they were not at the premises at the given time and that the Parmers are mistaken in their identifications.

    (b)  Terry did not provide a defence statement in this case. What are the consequences of him failing to do so? [1 Mark]
    The jury may draw an inference against him (1 mark).
  10. Jonny and Terry are charged with burglary and are due to appear before the Crown Court for trial. They are alleged to have committed a burglary at 29 Spindrift Avenue on the evening of21 October 2010. The occupants of the premises, Mr and Mrs Parmer, had been out for an early dinner that evening and returned home as Jonny and Terry were leaving the premises via the front door. Mr and Mrs Parmer saw two men come out of their front door and run off down the road carrying some bags. They saw both men for a few seconds from a distance of about 15 feet and recognised them as two men who had visited the house three days previously asking if the Parmers needed any work done on their house. Mrs Parmer called the police and two officers arrived within minutes in a marked police vehicle. Having obtained a description from Mrs Parmer, the police officers asked her to accompany them on a drive round the local area to see if she could spot the two men. Mr Parmer remained at the property. Within a few minutes Mrs Parmer pointed two men out to the officers. The two men were arrested and Mrs Parmer was returned back home. In her witness statement, Mrs Parmer described man one as between 5 feet 6 inches and 5feet 8 inches tall, white, black curly hair, a black moustache, wearing a grey tracksuit and agold chain. Man two was between 5 feet 8 inches and 5 feet 10 inches tall, white, bald, and wearing a green tracksuit. Mr Parmer provided the same description of man one but could only remember that man two was white and bald. Mr Parmer was asked to attend a formal identification procedure at the police station the following day. He was able to identify Jonny (man one) but not Terry (man two). Mrs Parmer was not asked to attend any identification procedure at the police station. Both Defendants say that whilst they had offered their services to householders in the area, they were not at the premises at the given time and that the Parmers are mistaken in their identifications.

    (c) Is the Judge obliged to give a Turnbull direction in this case? Give reasons for your answer. [2 Marks]
    Yes. A Turnbull direction of the special need for caution is mandatory (1 mark) in cases which depend wholly or substantially on the correctness of one or more identifications of the accused which the Defence alleges to be mistaken (1 mark).
  11. Jonny and Terry are charged with burglary and are due to appear before the Crown Court for trial. They are alleged to have committed a burglary at 29 Spindrift Avenue on the evening of21 October 2010. The occupants of the premises, Mr and Mrs Parmer, had been out for an early dinner that evening and returned home as Jonny and Terry were leaving the premises via the front door. Mr and Mrs Parmer saw two men come out of their front door and run off down the road carrying some bags. They saw both men for a few seconds from a distance of about 15 feet and recognised them as two men who had visited the house three days previously asking if the Parmers needed any work done on their house. Mrs Parmer called the police and two officers arrived within minutes in a marked police vehicle. Having obtained a description from Mrs Parmer, the police officers asked her to accompany them on a drive round the local area to see if she could spot the two men. Mr Parmer remained at the property. Within a few minutes Mrs Parmer pointed two men out to the officers. The two men were arrested and Mrs Parmer was returned back home. In her witness statement, Mrs Parmer described man one as between 5 feet 6 inches and 5feet 8 inches tall, white, black curly hair, a black moustache, wearing a grey tracksuit and agold chain. Man two was between 5 feet 8 inches and 5 feet 10 inches tall, white, bald, and wearing a green tracksuit. Mr Parmer provided the same description of man one but could only remember that man two was white and bald. Mr Parmer was asked to attend a formal identification procedure at the police station the following day. He was able to identify Jonny (man one) but not Terry (man two). Mrs Parmer was not asked to attend any identification procedure at the police station. Both Defendants say that whilst they had offered their services to householders in the area, they were not at the premises at the given time and that the Parmers are mistaken in their identifications.

    (d) List five factors the Judge ought to tell the jury to consider when deciding whether the witnesses were correct in the identifications. [5 Marks]
    • ·     How long did the witness have the accused under observation? (1 mark)
    • ·     At what distance? (1 mark)
    • ·     In what light? (1 mark)
    • ·     Was the observation impeded in any way? (1 mark)
    • ·     Had the witness ever seen the accused before? (1 mark)

    (these are examples – credit any factors from Turnbull that are mentioned)
  12. Peter has been charged with burglary of a warehouse. He has pleaded not guilty in the Magistrates’ Court and consented to summary trial. The case against him is primarily based on the evidence of Tom who selected Peter in a video identification procedure as being the person he saw running away from the scene carrying the stolen property. During the interview Peter made no comment to all questions asked of him by the police. Peter claims that the video identification procedure has been conducted in breach of the Codes issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). His defence at trial will be alibi.

    (a) If the Court concludes that there has been a breach of PACE, what test may the Court use to determine whether the Prosecution should be allowed to adduce the identification evidence? [2 marks]
    (a)  The test can be found in s.78 of PACE. The evidence should be excluded if the Court concludes that,having regard to all of the circumstances, including the circumstances in which the evidence was obtained, the admission of the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the Court ought not to admit it (2 marks). The students do not have to quote this test exactly, but must demonstrate that they understand the basic principle behind it.
  13. Peter has been charged with burglary of a warehouse. He has pleaded not guilty in the Magistrates’ Court and consented to summary trial. The case against him is primarily based on the evidence of Tom who selected Peter in a video identification procedure as being the person he saw running away from the scene carrying the stolen property. During the interview Peter made no comment to all questions asked of him by the police. Peter claims that the video identification procedure has been conducted in breach of the Codes issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). His defence at trial will be alibi.

    (b)  Assume that Peter has given evidence of an alibi during the trial. At the conclusion of
    the defence evidence the Prosecution submits to the Court that the Magistrates can draw such inferences as appear proper from Peter’s refusal to answer questions in interview. Briefly explain the main principles that the Magistrates should apply when considering if an inference can be drawn.
    (b)  The principles that apply can be found in s.34 of the CJPOA 1994 and in the case of R v. Argent [1997]. The students do not need to set out the exact section or the case law to obtain the marks, but they must demonstrate an understanding of the principles. The main ones to expect the students to include in their answers are, firstly that it would be a failure to mention [1 mark] a fact in interview which the Defendant later relied on in the trial (1mark). Secondly the fact relied on in trial had to be a fact which the Defendant could reasonably have been expected to mention when questioned in interview (1 mark).

    Total of 3marks.
  14. Peter has been charged with burglary of a warehouse. He has pleaded not guilty in the
    Magistrates’ Court and consented to summary trial. The case against him is primarily based
    on the evidence of Tom who selected Peter in a video identification procedure as being the
    person he saw running away from the scene carrying the stolen property. During the
    interview Peter made no comment to all questions asked of him by the police. Peter claims that the video identification procedure has been conducted in breach of the Codes issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). His defence at trial will be alibi.

    (c) Peter is convicted of the burglary by the Magistrates. He now wishes to appealagainst his conviction to the Crown Court. Explain how the Crown Court will beconstituted when it hears the appeal from the Magistrates’ Court and the procedurewhich will be adopted for the appeal.

    (5 marks)
    (c) The students should identify that the appeal will be conducted by a High Court/Circuit Judge/Recorder and two lay Magistrates (1 mark). The appeal will be a re-hearing of the case (1mark). This will mean that the Prosecution will go first and call its evidence, followed by the Defence (1mark). Both parties have the same right to speeches as they do in the Magistrates’ Court (1 mark). At the conclusion of the evidence the Judge and Magistrates will retire to consider if the appeal should be allowed or not (1 mark).

    Total 5 marks
  15. Desmond (aged 24) lives with his mother in Bristol. He is arrested and charged with an offence of dangerous driving (an indictable offence) and is bailed by the police to appear at the Magistrates’ Court. Before his first appearance for the driving offence he is arrested again – this time for selling Class A drugs (ecstasy) to two school boys outside a local school(an indictable offence). He is arrested in the act of making the sale and as he is taken away by the police he shouts to the boys, “If you say a word, you’re dead!” As a result of his second arrest his mother tells him she doesn’t want him back in her house. He is taken before the Magistrates’ Court in custody.

    (a) On what ground or grounds is the Prosecution likely to object to bail? State your reasons.
    Fear of further offences – the Defendant committed the present offence whist on bail for the first. (1 mark)

    Fear of failure to appear: the Defendant is apparently homeless. He is also looking at a custodial sentence for the drugs offence and therefore has a motive to abscond (the ground plus one reason for the mark). (1 mark)

    Interference with witnesses – because of the threat. (1 mark)
  16. Desmond is committed to the Crown Court for trial. Stephanie is instructed to prosecute at
    the plea and case management hearing in the Crown Court. She sees that the dangerous
    driving and the drugs offence appear on the same indictment. She takes the view that they cannot be tried together and that the counts are misjoined. However, she does want Desmond to be prosecuted for both offences.

    (b) What application should Stephanie make to the Judge? If she fails to make it, what
    application is Defence Counsel likely to make?
    She should apply to stay the indictment and prefer two fresh indictments. (1 mark) Blackstone’s D11.57

    If she fails to do so the Defence is likely to apply to quash the indictment. (1 mark) Blackstone’s D 11.96
  17. The dangerous driving trial has started in the Crown Court. PC Small is called to give evidence, and when he comes into Court one of the jurors sends a note to the Judge which reads, “This witness is a friend of mine. We play on the same darts team. I didn’t realise he was involved in this case till he walked into Court.”

    (c) What should the Judge do? Give your reasons.
    The Judge should simply discharge this one juror (1 mark) as there would not seem to be any risk that the rest of the jury will have been in any way affected (1 mark) [if such a risk existed he could discharge the whole jury] Blackstone’s D13.47-50.
  18. Desmond is eventually convicted of the dangerous driving. The Prosecution decides not to proceed with the drugs offence. At the sentencing hearing the Judge is considering passing a custodial sentence.

    (d) What statutory test will the Judge apply in deciding whether or not the custody threshold is passed and if the Judge were minded to pass a suspended sentence, what is the maximum period of imprisonment that he could pass?
    S.152 CJA 2003 so “serious” that neither a fine nor community sentence is justified. (1mark) No need for the section number. Max 12 months imprisonment: Blackstone’s E6.2. (1 mark).
  19. Desmond is eventually convicted of the dangerous driving. The Prosecution decides not to proceed with the drugs offence. At the sentencing hearing the Judge is considering passing a custodial sentence.

    (e) If the Judge were minded to impose a community order instead, what is the
    maximum number of hours of unpaid work that could be ordered?
    300 hours

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview