skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 137122 Find in a Library
Title: Magistrates' Court or Crown Court? Mode of Trial Decision and Sentencing
Author(s): C Hedderman; D Moxon
Corporate Author: Home Office Research Unit
United Kingdom
Date Published: 1992
Page Count: 53
Sponsoring Agency: Her Majesty's Stationery Office
Norwich, NR3 1GN,
Home Office Research Unit
London, England SW1
Publication Number: ISBN 011-341036-0
Sale Source: Her Majesty's Stationery Office
PO Box 29
Norwich, NR3 1GN,
United Kingdom
Type: Survey
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: A study was conducted to determine the reasons for differences in severity of sentencing for convicted offenders handled by the Crown Court versus magistrates' courts.
Abstract: Using data from court records, the characteristics of cases were identified for the three types of trial categories: cases dealt with by magistrates' courts, those in which defendants elected trial, and those in which magistrates declined jurisdiction. Data from interviews with defendants and solicitors was examined to assess the reasons for the mode of trial decision and especially the reasons why so many of those who chose to be dealt with at the Crown Court ultimately pleaded guilty. The overall differences in the sentencing practices of magistrates' courts and the Crown Court are examined in relation to each of the offence categories covered in the study. The high cost of Crown Court trial, both in terms of direct costs and the indirect costs of more severe sentences, and a higher remand population seem to offer few tangible benefits, particularly for the defendants. The fact that magistrates' courts in some areas manage to deal with a much higher proportion of either way cases than others, with no obvious difficulties, suggests that the scope for the Crown Prosecution Service and magistrates to agree on summary trial in many more cases is very considerable. Defendants and their legal advisors should opt for summary trial if they do not have the evidence to sustain a not guilty plea.
Main Term(s): Foreign courts
Index Term(s): Court delays; England; Sentencing trends; Trials
Note: Home Office Research Study No. 125
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=137122

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.