R v Stocker [2013] EWCA Crim 1993 – Rules 1.1 and 14.2(1) [10.2(1)] CrimPR – SOA.
1) indictments should not be quashed purely because of a technical defect.
- the overriding objective was to ensure the acquittal of the innocent and conviction of the guilty.
- procedural and technical points to be taken at time of trial.
2) indictment not nullified by giving wrong year of statute if D nonetheless notified of case he has to meet and of correct statutory provision which applies and the offence of which D actually convicted is known to law.
undefined: unpaid
Related case digests
- R v Clarke [2015] EWCA Crim 350 – R 14.2 CrimPR 2014 - (r 10.2 CrimPR 2015) – s 3 IA – s 101 CJA 2003.
1) sufficiency of indictment (or information or charge). - under CrimPR sufficient if clear as to what P alleges against D. - no longer necessary for indictment to specify ingredients of the offence. 2) prejudicial effect of evidence may be eliminated by agreement on formula for giving evidence. – whether evidence more prejudicial than probative. 3) bad character provisions of the CJA 2003 not appropriate to admit evidence of a previous offence where P did not seek to rely on it.