Newton Hearing Definition

GLOSSARY

/ˈnjuːt(ə)n/ /ˈhɪərɪŋ/

Published by a UU��ֱ�� Corporate Crime expert

What does Newton Hearing mean?

A hearing in criminal proceedings required when the defendant pleads guilty to an offence(s) but there is disagreement with the prosecution as to the material facts on which the defendant should be sentenced. This can occur when the accused pleads guilty on a specific basis that the prosecution does not accept.

During a newton hearing, evidence is called by both parties and the judge (sitting without a jury) or the magistrates decide the basis on which they will pass sentence. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to satisfy the court beyond reasonable doubt that their version of events is correct.

View the related checklists about Newton Hearing

Case management in the magistrates’ court—checklist

Case management in the magistrates’ court—checklist This Checklist should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Case management in the magistrates’ courts. Prior to getting to court Note that certain criminal cases are managed via Common Platform (the digital case management system for the magistrates’ court). In these cases, the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC) and other case material will be served and accessed online through Common Platform. Case progression, including completing the Preparation for Effective Trial form (PET form) and serving any applications, will also be conducted through Common Platform. For more information, see Practice Note: How to use Common Platform and the Digital Case System. Requesting the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case • defence advocates should obtain the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC) by emailing, telephoning or writing to the relevant contact at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The contact details are published on the website for the relevant district of the CPS. The following information is usually required for IDPC requests: ◦...

Common grounds for appealing conviction and sentence—checklist

Common grounds for appealing conviction and sentence—checklist Grounds of appeal must be settled with sufficient particularity to enable the Registrar, and subsequently the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (CACD), to identify clearly the matters relied upon. A mere formula such as ‘the conviction is unsafe’ or ‘the sentence is in all the circumstances too severe’ will be deemed ineffective. This checklist summarises some of the common grounds for appealing conviction and sentence, which can provide the basis for an appeal in the CACD. It should be read in conjunction with the following Practice Notes: Criminal appeals—certificates of fitness to appeal from the Crown Court, Starting an appeal in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (CACD) and Conducting an appeal in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (CACD). For information on appeals in the Crown Court, see Practice Notes: Appealing a conviction in the Crown Court and Appeal against sentence in the Crown Court. Grounds for appealing conviction The single test for the CACD to determine when considering an appeal against...

Sentencing dangerous offenders

Sentencing dangerous offenders This Practice Note reflects the procedural code for sentencing offenders in England and Wales (Sentencing Code) that applies from 1 December 2020, as set out in Parts 2–13 of the Sentencing Act 2020 (SA 2020). It reflects the updates made in Part 7 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PCSCA 2022). PCSCA 2022, Pt 7 had the effect of increasing the length of time that an individual must serve prior to their release on licence for certain violent or sexual offences. For those considering whether the Sentencing Code applies to their case, see Practice Note: Sentencing Code. Abolition of IPPs and EPPs Historically, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) provided for sentences of imprisonment for public protection (IPPs) and detention for public protection as well as extended sentences for certain violent and sexual offences (EPPs). These were abolished by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO 2012). The current sentencing regime for sentencing dangerous offenders provides...

Burglary

Burglary Burglary In most cases burglary is an either-way offence and so it can be tried in the magistrates' court or the Crown Court. Burglary triable only on indictment Under the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (MCA 1980), there are some categories of burglary that can only be tried on the Crown Court: • aggravated burglary (where a burglary is committed with a firearm or imitation firearm, or any weapon or explosive) • burglary that involves the commission of, or the intention to commit, an indictable only offence • burglary of a dwelling house where a person is subject to violence or the threat of violence, and • where the ‘three strike rule’ applies—the burglary was a domestic burglary, the accused is 18 or over and at the date of the offence had previously been convicted on two separate occasions of domestic burglary committed after 30 November 1999 Burglary of a dwelling is a distinct offence from burglary of any other type of building, eg a commercial building. The elements of...

Discover our 23 Practice Notes on Newton Hearing

Former investment adviser sentenced for money laundering

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has announced that Richard Faithfull has been sentenced to five years and ten months imprisonment after pleading guilty to breaching section 327 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. He has also been disqualified from being a company director for ten years.

Professional discipline—the importance of the factual matrix in conviction cases (Achina v General Pharmaceutical Council)

Corporate Crime analysis: The decision in Achina v General Pharmaceutical Council reaffirms that those with convictions cannot seek to go behind the facts before their professional regulator. The appellant in this case was sentenced to two years and six months for theft of medications while employed as a pharmacist. Addressing the Committee of the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC), he made many attempts to go behind his conviction, flying in the face of the evidence he had accepted in the Crown Court. His lack of insight into the offending was key to the Committee, who ordered his removal from the register. The appeal against that removal was dismissed by the High Court. Written by Alecsandra Manning-Rees, barrister at 5 St Andrew’s Hill.

Read the latest 15 News articles on Newton Hearing

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Case studies

"In some areas of research there were also significant time savings. You get to what you are looking for more quickly, which all goes to the value of the product."

Harper Mcleod

Access all documents on Newton Hearing

GET ACCESS NOW

Top

Trial

UU��ֱ��

GLOSSARY