Cummings v Crown Prosecution Service
PC Parsons was present throughout the procedure, heard all questions and answers, and completed the form together with PS Moreland. She was satisfied as to its accuracy, thus verified it. The requirements of section 139 were met, and her evidence was direct, not hearsay. The appeal is dismissed.
- Parties
- Appellant: Davina Caroline Cummings; Respondent: Crown Prosecution Service
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 15 December 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Refreshing Memory, Road Traffic Offences, Admissibility of Evidence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Davina Caroline Cummings
Appellant
Crown Prosecution Service
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a police officer who witnessed but did not complete or sign a contemporaneous record (MG DD/A form) may use it to refresh her memory under section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
- 2 Whether the requirements of section 139 for 'made or verified' were satisfied
- 3 Whether the evidence given was hearsay or direct evidence
Ratio Decidendi
PC Parsons was present throughout the procedure, heard all questions and answers, and completed the form together with PS Moreland. She was satisfied as to its accuracy, thus verified it. The requirements of section 139 were met, and her evidence was direct, not hearsay. The appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Respondent's costs summarily assessed at £738.50, not to be enforced without leave of the court
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment