A. E. Bottoms - Defendants in the Criminal Process

Defendants in the Criminal Process — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "Defendants in the Criminal Process" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

↓

↑

Georgia Tahoma Arial Verdana

Reset

Interval:

↓

↑

Bookmark:

Make

1234567...68

Routledge Revivals

Defendants in the Criminal Process

First published in 1976, this book examines the practical workings of the English criminal court system, focusing on the defendants experiences of the system and the decisions he takes as he passes through it. Indeed, the defendant in a criminal case is in a unique position to experience the whole criminal process, from the first approaches of the investigating policeman to conviction, sentence and possible appeal.

Defendants in the Criminal Process is based upon the close observation of criminal cases and on interviews with defendants. The authors raise several issues and questions to be addressed by those involved in the administration of justice, whether as court administrators, judges, magistrates or lawyers. They also discuss issues of special importance for academics and others concerned with the explanation of the court process.

Defendants in the Criminal Process

A. E. Bottoms and J. D. McClean

First published in 1976

by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd

This edition first published in 2013 by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN

Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada

by Routledge

711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

1976 A. E. Bottoms and J. D. McClean

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Publishers Note

The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint but points out that some imperfections in the original copies may be apparent.

Disclaimer

The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and welcomes correspondence from those they have been unable to contact.

A Library of Congress record exists under ISBN: 76362100

ISBN 13: 978-0-415-81513-0 (hbk)

ISBN 13: 978-0-203-06637-9 (ebk)

Defendants in the criminal process

A. E. Bottoms

and

J. D. McClean

Faculty of Law,

University of Sheffield

assisted by

Isobel Todd

Routledge & Kegan Paul

London, Henley and Boston

First published in 1976

by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd

76 Carter Lane,

London EC4V 5EL,

Reading Road,

Henley-on-Thames,

Oxon RG9 1EN and

9 Park Street,

Boston, Mass. 02108, USA

A. E. Bottoms and J. D. McClean 1976

No part of this book may be reproduced in
any form without permission from the
publisher, except for the quotation of brief
passages in criticism

ISBN 0 7100 8274 6

Tables

1952	Magistrates Courts Act 1952 (15 & 16 Geo. VI and 1 Eliz. II, c.55)
s.18
s.19
s.25
s.28
s.29
s.38
s.83
s.93
1962	Criminal Justice Administration Act 1962 (10 & 11 Eliz. II, c.15)
1966	Criminal Appeal Act 1966 (c.31)
1967	Criminal Justice Act 1967 (c.80)
s.1
s.18
s.21
s.57
pt IV (ss.7384)
1968	Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (c. 19)
Theft Act (c.60)
s.1
s.12
1971	Courts Act (c.23)
s. 12
1972	Legal Advice and Assistance Act (c.50)
Criminal Justice Act (c.71)
s.37
1974	Legal Aid Act (c.4)
s.29
s.30

Brady v. U.S. 397 U.S. 742 (1970)

Escobedo v. Illinois 378 U.S. 478 (1964)

Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U. S. 335 (1963)

Practice-Note, [1970] 1 W.L.R. 663, [1970] 1 All E.R. 1119, 54 Cr. App. R. 280

Practice Note, [1970] 2 All E.R. 805

R. v. Armstrong, [1951] 2 All E.R. 219

R. v. Bodmin Justices, ex parte McEwen, [1947] K.B. 221

R. v. Coe, [1968] 1 W.L.R. 1950, [1969] 1 All E.R. 65; 53 Cr. App. R. 66

R. v. De Haan, [1968] 2 Q.B. 108, [1968] 2 W.L.R. 626; [1967] 3 All. E.R. 618

R. v. Ellis [1973] Crim. L.R. 389, 57 Cr. App. R. 571

R. v. Everest, [1968] Crim. L. R. 688, 53 Cr. App. R. 20

R. v. Gowerton Justices, ex parte Davies, [1974] Crim. L.R. 253

R. v. Hall, [1968] Q.B. 788, [1968] 2 All E.R. 1009, 52 Cr. App. R. 528

R. v. Kings Lynn Justices, ex parte Carter, [1969] 1 Q.B. 488, [1968] 3 All E.R. 858, 53 Cr. App. R. 42; (pet. dis.), [1968] 3 W.L.R. 1217

R. v. Lymm Justices, ex parte Brown, [1973] 1 W.L.R. 1039, [1973] 1 All E.R. 716

R. v. McPherson, [1973] Crim. L. R. 191

R. v. Middlesex Quarter Sessions, ex parte D.P.P. (1950), 34 Cr. App. R. 112

R. v. Phillips (1947), 111 J.P. 333

R. v. Pitson (1972), 56 Cr. App. R. 391

R. v. Rear, unreported, 2 March 1965

R. v. Robinson (1854), 23 L.J.Q.B. 286

R. v. Rose (1898), 18 Cox C.C. 717

R. v. South Greenhoe Justices, ex parte D.P.P., [1950] 2 All E.R. 42; sub nom R. v. Norfolk Justices (1950), 34 Cr. App. R. 120

R. v. Tower Bridge Magistrate, ex parte Osman, [1971] 1 W.L.R. 1109, [1971] 2 All E.R. 1018, 55 Cr. App. R. 436

R. v. Tucker, [1974] 2 All E.R. 639

R. v. Turner, [1970] 2 Q.B. 321, [1970] 2 W.L.R. 1093, [1970] 2 All E.R. 281, 54 Cr. App. R. 352

R. v. Vallett (1950), 34 Cr. App. R. 251

R. v. Wakefield Justices, ex parte Butterworth, [1970] 1 All E.R. 1181

R. v. Wharton, [1955] Crim. L. R. 565

Santobello v. New York 404 U.S. 257 (1971)

This book is concerned with the defendants participation in the processes of the English criminal courts, and with the quality of justice in those courts as it is experienced and assessed by the defendants themselves. To each defendant, his case is of special importance, whether the charges are grave or petty, so we examine a wide spectrum of cases, guilty pleas as well as contested trials, the daily round of the magistrates court as well as the occasional Crown Court drama. The defendant experiences, as no one else does, the whole criminal process, from the first questions of the investigating policeman through to trial, sentence and possible appeal. An account of the court system based on the defendants experience of it shows how the various parts of the process knit together, and how decisions taken at an early stage, long before the case even reaches court, can shape the development of the whole.

Next page

1234567...68

Light

Font size:

↓

↑

Georgia Tahoma Arial Verdana

Reset

Interval:

↓

↑

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «Defendants in the Criminal Process»

Look at similar books to Defendants in the Criminal Process. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.

Jacobson Jessica

Inside Crown Court: Personal Experiences and Questions of Legitimacy

Michael Naughton

The Innocent and the Criminal Justice System: A Sociological Analysis of Miscarriages of Justice

Ana Aliverti

Crimes of Mobility: Criminal Law and the Regulation of Immigration

Matthew Clair

Privilege and Punishment: How Race and Class Matter in Criminal Court

Jenni Ward

Transforming Summary Justice: Modernisation in the Lower Criminal Courts

Peter Irons

The Steps to the Supreme Court: A Guided Tour of the American Legal System

Christopher E. Smith

The Rehnquist Court and Criminal Punishment

Byrne Hessick Carissa

Punishment Without Trial: Why Plea Bargaining Is a Bad Deal

Grace Nancy

Objection!: how high-priced defense attorneys, celebrity defendants, and a 24/7 media have hijacked our criminal justice system

Hafemeister

Criminal Trials and Mental Disorders (Psychology and Crime)

Taaffe

Pleading not guilty in a criminal matter

Lawrence F. Travis III

Introduction to Criminal Justice

Discussion, reviews of the book Defendants in the Criminal Process and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.