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: 137180 Find in a Library
Title: Monitoring Time Limits on Custodial Remands
Author(s): P F Henderson
Corporate Author: Great Britain Home Office
Research and Planning Unit
United Kingdom
Date Published: 1991
Page Count: 47
Sponsoring Agency: Great Britain Home Office
London. SW1H 9AT, England
Publication Number: ISBN 0-86252-580-2
Sale Source: Great Britain Home Office
Research and Planning Unit
50 Queen Anne's Gate
London. SW1H 9AT,
United Kingdom
Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: The use of time limits for bringing defendants to trial in the United Kingdom was introduced in three areas in 1987 and an additional seven areas in 1988; this paper reports on the monitoring of the implementation of the limits in 1987 and 1988.
Abstract: The study examined the times spent in custody awaiting trial at both magistrates' courts and the Crown Court, the reasons advanced for requests for adjournments, the proportion of cases that exceeded the chosen limits, and the causes of this delay. Also examined were those cases in which applications for time extension were refused. The 1988 information on time in custody before disposal encompasses a 6-month period and 10 Crown Prosecution Service areas. The study found that time limits for case processing were exceeded in 5 percent of the cases. The mean time spent in custody before summary trial was 21 days. Regarding the time for processing before committal to the Crown Court, extensions were required in 8.5 percent of the cases, and approximately 50 percent reached committal within 6 weeks. The mean time in custody before committal was 53 days. For the time taken in the Crown Court from committal to arraignment, extensions were required in only 2.6 percent of the cases, and 66 percent of arraignments were conducted within 8 weeks of committal. When extensions were necessary, the most common reason given in the magistrates' court in both years was to await full committal, with or without other reasons being given. Full committal requires the presentation of evidence, can require the presence of witnesses, and is a lengthy process. In the Crown Court, the most common reason given in extension applications was listing difficulties. Appended data, monitoring forms, and 9 references
Main Term(s): Court case flow management
Index Term(s): Detention; Foreign courts
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=137180

*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.