This is a compilation of all of the practice questions from the SGS (Class) preparations as well as any other practice materials.
This is perfect for OPEN BOOK exams as they often repeat the same/same style questions in the exams so you can see how to go through a question. You just need to la...
ADVANCED CRIMINAL LAW AND PRACTICE NOTES
UK POLICE RANKS (low to high)
● Constable ● Superintendent
● Sergeant ● Metropolitan Police
● Inspector ● Other British forces[edit]
● Chief Inspector ● Chief Superintendent
SGS 1 ADVANCED POLICE STATION SKILLS
SGS 1 Pre-SGS Activity
1. In what circumstances would the searches of Lucas’s and his grandmother’s properties be lawful? What
further information (if any) would you need in order to fully consider the lawfulness of the searches?
Section 18 PACE searches of locations that are ‘controlled’ (Section 18(1)) by the suspect will be lawful if they are
authorised by an officer ranking at inspector or above (section 18(4)) and that authorisation is in writing (Section
18(7)) and there must be reasonable grounds for suspecting that there is evidence on the premises relating to the
offence or to another indictable offence similar or connected to the arrest (section 18(1)(a)-(b)).
R V BADHAM
S32 PACE 1984 - S32(2)(b) the right to search the house is only upon arrest. Therefore the search of their
Grandmother’s property would only be lawful if they had control over her property.
In order for a search of Lucas’s property to be lawful, authorisation must be given by an officer ranking at inspector
or above.The authorities must also prove that they have a reasonable grounds for suspecting that there will be
evidence of the robbery at either location - as of right now, “Because Lucas is always sleeping over. There’s bound
be something worth a look in Doreen’s,” is not sufficient grounds.
Further information needed: Evidence that Lucas had ‘control’ of his grandmother’s property.
2. In what circumstances are the police allowed to seize items located in a search of a property?
Police can seize anything found on the premises which is believed to have been obtained as a result of an offence
or to be evidence in relation to an offence or which might be used by the arrested person to escape custody
(section 32(9) PACE).
3. Is there a duty on the police to record details of the nature of the evidence that they are looking for when
they conduct a house search? No
4. What action do the police need to take after a search has taken place with regard to any property seized?
COP B 7.11 the officer in charge of the investigation must make sure the property is properly secured
COP 7.12 they shall provide the occupier of the premise or the person from whom the property is being seized with
a written notice… (PG 17 COP B).
5. In what circumstances can police search an arrested person? Do not confuse this with the powers to
stop and search prior to arrest under s.1 PACE.
Under Section 32 PACE, the police may search an arrested person for anything which may assist them in escaping
or which might be evidence relating to the offence.
Furthermore, S32(1) PACE 1984 states that a constable may search an arrested person in any case where the
person to be searched has been arrested at a place other than a police station, if the constable has reasonable
grounds for believing that the arrested person may present a danger to themself or others.
SGS 1 Activity 2
1. How would you respond to DC Wade’s intention to interview Lucas about these further offences?
I would ask DC Wade for further disclosure by asking questions like:
Robbery 1: Money at ATM
● What time is the offence alleged to have happened?
1
, ● What are the descriptions of the men involved?
● Was anything else stolen?
● Have the tickets been identified as belonging to the victim?
● Have any forensics (i.e. fingerprints) been taken from the tickets?
● Has Lucas been asked any questions or made any significant statements in respect of this offence?
Robbery 2: Tickets
● What time is the offence alleged to have happened?
● What are the descriptions of the men involved?
● Was anything else stolen?
● Has the wallet been identified as belonging to the victim and has anything been taken from the wallet?
● Have any forensics (i.e. fingerprints) been taken from the wallet?
● Has Lucas been asked any questions or made any significant statements in respect of this offence?
● Has Sally been asked any questions or made any significant statements in respect of this offence?
2. Advise Lucas as to:
a) Whether the search of his flat and the seizure of the tickets were lawful. Lucas is under arrest for an
indictable offence (s. 18(1)).
- A constable can enter any premises occupied or controlled by a person who is under arrest for an indictable
offence. If it is his flat then Lucas has control over the premises.
- The search appeared to be authorised by an inspector (s. 18(4)). It is necessary to look at the written
authorisation to confirm what the grounds for the search were.
- The facts state there is no further information on the custody record. This may be a breach of s.18(7) which
requires the inspector to make a record in writing of the grounds for the search and of the nature of the
evidence that was sought. This failure makes it difficult to assess the legality of any grounds.
- Authorisation should only be granted by the inspector if there are reasonable grounds for believing that there is
evidence in the flat relating to the robbery on Robert Watson (‘RW’) or some other indictable offence which is
connected with or similar to that robbery (s. 18 (1)). It must be specific to an offence and not simply taking an
opportunity to see if there is any evidence because Lucas might have committed other crimes. On the face of it
that does not appear to be satisfied. At the time of the search there was no reason to suspect that there was
any other evidence relating to the offence on RW, as the police had the money and the beanie hat already, or to
suspect Lucas of another offence. S18 (2) allows for the seizure and retention of the evidence. Alternatively,
items can always be seized under section 19.
b) Whether the search of Doreen’s flat and the seizure of the wallet were lawful.
DC Wade does not seem to suggest that she is searching Doreen’s under s.18, which will need authority from the
inspector. If she was, before it could be granted the inspector would have to be satisfied that the criteria were met.
Doreen is not under arrest. Nor at the time the search was conducted was Sally. There is no suggestion that Lucas
is in control of the property, so even if he stays there occasionally this is not necessarily enough to show that it is
occupied or controlled by him. The authority should only be given when the authorising officer is satisfied that the
premises are occupied or controlled by the arrested person and that the necessary grounds exist (COP B 4.3). We
would need to see the authorisation if it exists. DC Wade suggested that the authorisation had been granted by an
officer of the rank of sergeant. We should examine the custody record.
The search may have been lawful under s. 32 PACE, which, when a person has been arrested for an indictable
offence, grants police officers the power to search the premises where the person was arrested or where the
person was immediately before being arrested. This should
- take place at the time of arrest and
- the police must have reasonable grounds for believing that there is evidence on the premises relating to the
offence for which the suspect has been arrested.
2
,APPLY: Lucas was not in the house and the police do not seem to think he had been in the house immediately
before he was arrested. What evidence relating to the robbery on RW did the police believe would be found? If on
the premises lawfully, s.19 would provide DC Wade with wide powers of seizure. Furthermore, in line with R v
Badham, the search should have been conducted at the time of arrest.
Conclude: It would seem that the search was unlawful.
c) The admissibility as evidence of the items seized in both searches.
Although illegally obtained, evidence can be admitted at court if there is any suggestion that the evidence was
obtained in breach of PACE we might want to consider an application to exclude the evidence under s. 78 PACE.
APPLY: The new evidence is the tickets to a Razors’ concert found in Lucas’ room at his flat and the wallet in
Sally’s room at Doreen’s flat. Both pieces of evidence are important and potentially very incriminating. They can be
admitted at court.
3. Given your answers above, how would you advise Lucas to respond to questions when interviewed
under caution in relation to these two new offences?
You will need to consider:
A. What you would advise if you believe that either or both of the searches were unlawful.
If you think that the searches were unlawful or might be deemed unlawful and therefore there might be an
application to exclude evidence under s. 78, then you need to consider whether to advise ‘no comment’ in relation
to these new offences. If the application is successful, then the evidence might not be admissible but any
comments made by Lucas in interview regarding the tickets or the wallet or generally in relation to these offences
can still be admitted which could negate the effect of the s.78 application. However, if the evidence is admitted any
silence could, of course, lead to an inference being drawn as per s.34 CJPOA
B. What you would advise Lucas if he wished to give a ‘mixed interview’.
If Lucas wished to give a mixed interview (where he answers some questions and not others) then the contents of
the whole interview would be admissible. In contrast, if he answered ‘no comment’ to all questions, the content of
the interview would not be evidence, albeit an inference could be drawn under s.34 CJPOA from his failure to
answer questions.
4. What issues does the arrest of Sally raise and how would you deal with them?
Although the search was not lawful, Sally’s arrest is arguably legal as it is based on reasonable suspicion that an
offence has been committed. The location of the wallet which is suspected of being stolen will provide reasonable
grounds for the arrest. However, the possible inadmissibility of the wallet as evidence needs to be considered in
advising Sally as to whether to answer questions in relation to the wallet.
The search of Sally on arrest is also covered by s.32:
(1) A constable may search an arrested person, in any case where the person to be searched has been arrested at
a place other than a police station, if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that the arrested person
may present a danger to himself or others.
(2) Subject to subsections (3) to (5) below, a constable shall also have power in any such case—
(a) to search the arrested person for anything—
(i) which he might use to assist him to escape from lawful custody; or
(ii) which might be evidence relating to an offence.
The fact the officer found drugs in her pocket means that Sally now has her own criminal case and that I will also
need to take instructions from her.
SGS 2 - POLICE INTERVIEW + LEGAL AID
SGS 2 Pre-SGS Activity
1. 17 yr old def (Ami) staying at aunt’s (Freda). Aunt says she can’t live with her anymore unless she
confesses. What, if any, issues does you conversation with Freda Mohan raise?
3
, Appropriate adult
- Freda Mohan has received admissions of guilt from Ami prior to attending as the Appropriate Adult. On that
basis she should not be the AA Code C NFG 1 B.
- Can Ami’s mother be her appropriate adult? She may fall under the estranged adult exception Code C NFG 1B.
Confession
Your duty as a solicitor is to act in your client’s best interests SRA Code of Conduct Principle 4. It might be that
my best legal advice is contrary to what the AA might feel is the best course of action. As such, I must remind the
AA of her role, which is to facilitate communication, ensure the interview is being conducted fairly and to advise the
suspect CODE C 11.17. I must emphasise that advice does not mean legal advice and it is important that the AA
understands that you have a duty to act in your client’s best interests.
Conclude: Freda not act as an AA for Ami because she has received an admission of guilt and depending on their
relationship, her mother should not either. If Freda does act as the AA I must explain her role to her as mentioned
above.
2. Regardless of your answer to question 1, what would you advise Ami about the AA sitting in during
solicitor/ client consultation?
Ami has the right to have her aunt present but you must remind Ami that her aunt does not have a duty of
confidentiality CODE C NFG 1E.
There is no evidence directly linking Ami to a charge of possession with intent to supply. There is, however, strong
evidence of a simple possession charge and no matter what Ami says in her interview she will be charged with this
offence. As such, the best advice here would be for Ami to go ‘no comment’ in the interview.
On the facts it would seem that Freda will encourage Ami to make admissions and since her Aunt is ‘sensible’ Ami
may listen to her and make a confession. Ami’s aunt may not respect that a no comment interview is in Ami’s best
interests. Furthermore, there is a risk that she may disclose to the police what Ami has confessed to her.
3. Interview is hostile and you have to interrupt a few times. You ask for a pause when they introduce new
evidence. Cops want to replace you with duty solicitor. What representations will you make?
Code C 6.9 states that a suspect’s solicitor should only be removed if their conduct is such that the interviewer
cannot properly ask questions. The solicitor’s only role in the police station is to protect and advance the rights of
their client (Code C NFG 6D). The decision to remove a solicitor can only be made by a superintendent, or if a
superintendent is not available, an inspector. Solicitor cannot be removed from interview unless answering
questions on behalf of client Code C 6.9, 6.10 NFG 6D and 6E
APPLY: In this case your interventions are justified to prevent oppressive questioning and to ask for an opportunity
to consult with your client when new disclosure has been leaked. Furthermore, the custody sergeant is not of a high
enough rank to approve your removal.
SGS 2 Activity 2 - Interview
‘As solicitor has explained to you (re caution)’
- It is the officer’s duty (not the solicitor’s) to make sure the interviewee understands caution Code C NFG
10D.
- If appears that a person doesn’t understand the caution, person giving it should explain it in their own words.
‘Can you move’
- Solicitor should sit alongside client so that they can properly advise them during the interview.
- Should not be asked to move out of the way.
‘Only a trainee solicitor repping you’
- Solicitor should always explain their status (i.e. trainee) to the client in consultation, in line with the SRA code.
‘mom won’t visit him in prison’
- Q’s should be regarding suspect’s involvement in the offence. Code C 11.1 A
4
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller ccbittner. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $16.23. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
