Robinson v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland [2003] NICA 46(2) (28 November 2003)

Robinson v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland [2003] NICA 46(2) (28 November 2003)

The magistrate had sufficient material to justify admitting the appellant's acknowledgement of being the driver during the second, properly cautioned interview, given the passage of time, opportunity for legal advice, and absence of evidence of oppression or unreliability. However, the case is remitted for the magistrate to consider, under Article 74(2)(b) of the PACE Order, whether the later admission was not rendered unreliable by the earlier roadside encounter.

Citation
[2003] NICA 46
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Derek Martin Robinson; Complainant/respondent: Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
28 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Case remitted to magistrate for reconsideration under Article 74(2)(b) of the PACE Order; first question answered 'Yes'.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Confessions, Police Caution Requirements, Road Traffic (northern Ireland) Order 1981 Article 177, Police and Criminal Evidence (northern Ireland) Order 1989 Articles 74 and 76
Criminal Law Evidence Road Traffic Law Admissibility of Confessions Police Caution Requirements Road Traffic (northern Ireland) Order 1981 Article 177 Police and Criminal Evidence (northern Ireland) Order 1989 Articles 74 and 76

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Derek Martin Robinson

Defendant/appellant

Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland

Complainant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court properly admitted evidence relating to the provision by the appellant of a preliminary and evidential breath specimen and the results thereof (not pursued)
  2. 2 Whether the court properly admitted in evidence the contents of the appellant's PACE interview conducted at Strabane RUC station on 22 August 2000

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate had sufficient material to justify admitting the appellant's acknowledgement of being the driver during the second, properly cautioned interview, given the passage of time, opportunity for legal advice, and absence of evidence of oppression or unreliability. However, the case is remitted for the magistrate to consider, under Article 74(2)(b) of the PACE Order, whether the later admission was not rendered unreliable by the earlier roadside encounter.

Court Disposition

Case remitted to magistrate for reconsideration under Article 74(2)(b) of the PACE Order; first question answered 'Yes'.

Orders

  • Remit to magistrate to determine if the second interview admission was not rendered unreliable by the earlier roadside encounter under Article 74(2)(b) of the PACE Order.