AG v Channing [2004] JRC 126A (15 July 2004)

AG v Channing [2004] JRC 126A (15 July 2004)

The counts are properly joined as they allege similar conduct (falsification of documents by similar means over a short period), and there is no special feature making a joint trial prejudicial or embarrassing. With appropriate directions, there is no risk of unfairness to the defendant. Severance is refused.

Citation
[2004] JRC 126A
Parties
Defendant: Mr Channing; Prosecutor: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
15 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial (application for Severance of Counts)
Outcome
application for severance refused
Legal Topics
Joinder of Charges, Severance of Indictment, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Procedure Joinder of Charges Severance of Indictment Admissibility of Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Channing

Defendant

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial (application for Severance of Counts)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether counts relating to currency offences and insurance disc offences are properly joined in the same indictment
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to order severance of the counts

Ratio Decidendi

The counts are properly joined as they allege similar conduct (falsification of documents by similar means over a short period), and there is no special feature making a joint trial prejudicial or embarrassing. With appropriate directions, there is no risk of unfairness to the defendant. Severance is refused.

Court Disposition

application for severance refused

Orders

  • All counts to be tried together on the date fixed.