Upgrade to remove ads
Terms in this set (26)
Guzzardi v Italy
Suspected member of the Italian mafia was ordered to remain in a 2.5km area on a small island. His family was allowed to stay with him but it was not suitable for family life. This constituted a deprivation of liberty. The definition is circumstantial and there is no fixed list and can include considerations such as type, duration and effect.
R (Gillan) v Commission of Police of the Metropolis
Terrorism Act gave blanket stop and search powers. Two applicants were searched for 3-20 minutes and argued it was a deprivation of liberty. Applying Guzzardi they were not detained but wept from proceeding and so there was no breach.
18 hour curfew was held to be a deprivation of liberty.
12 hour curfew was held not to be a deprivation of liberty.
MB and AF
14 hour curfew was held not to be a deprivation of liberty.
Jackson v Stevenson
There was no power of search prior to arrest and so they must do this first before being entitled to interfere with the liberty of a person.
Chalmers v HMA
Except in the event of being caught red-handed, no person can lawfully be detained without a charge being made against him. Person not apprehended/charged but asked to go with two officers for questioning (depriving him of the rights that arise on being arrested). This was not allowed.
If there are reasonable grounds for suspicion that a person is in possession of drugs they can be searched and "detained" and seize any evidence found.
Wither v Reid
Met as they left the train and searched for drugs (due to a false tip off) . The defendant violently resisted and was charged with assaulting a police officer. She argued the arrest was unlawful and so she had the right to resist. As they were charged under s24 (which mentions arrest and not s23 which allows pre-arrest detention and search) she would rely on this. The police should have known the law accurately and known which provision they were using for it to be lawful.
The Thomson Committee 1975
Police powerless to act without consent of the person who is most likely to refuse. Shouldn't be a general power of arrest without evidence, but should be a regularising of inviting people to the police station (pre-arrest).
Detention and questioning brought in. Where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting a person has committed an offence a person may be detained and taken to the police station for investigation purposes.
Wilson v Robertson
Robbery of a vending machine with most evidence given under s14 detention. Argued, it was unlawful and that is where the evidence was brought out. Held, they had reasonable grounds since it was an inside job and they were last to leave/alone etc. "Reasonable grounds" don't need to prove guilt, just entertain a suspicion.
Arrest by ascertaining a warrant from the courts with evidence.
Brown v Selfridge
Previously courts tended to trust the police and wave everything through as a matter of course. Post HRA they must now be satisfied there is reasonable cause for suspicion.
Peggie v Clark
Arrest without a warrant may be made at common law in special circumstances where the police have "reasonable grounds", such as being caught red-handed/running from the scene/likely to flee.
Twycross v Farrell
Tip-off of an illegal sale of alcohol, on arrival saw a man holding stuff while talking to pupils. He tried to run away. The court found there were not reasonable grounds in this case for holding him without a warrant.
Mclean v Jessop
Pursued two people running from a crime scene and struck one with a baton. Turned out to be a neighbor chasing the thief. Held there were reasonable grounds for the use of force even though the belief was mistaken.
Power of arrest without a warrant where it is necessary in the interest of justice when found committing an offence to which the Act applies.
Nicol v Lowe
Arrested emerging from a driveway with another youth after midnight and upon search had incriminating objects. Held, it was not sufficient for reasonable suspicion to rely on something that was found after the arrest. Two hoodies was not enough, more suspicious behavior would be needed.
Keegan v Friel
The inclusion of CCTV evidence was allowed to show reasonable grounds for suspicion of the delinquents in their actions upon leaving the scene - not just during the crime itself.
Road Traffic Act
Can arrest without a warrant if they failed/refused a breath test ore reasonable belief the driver is under the influence.
McLeod v Shaw
Individual in a parked car was arrested due to a suspicion caused by glazed eyes and slurred speech. Reasonable belief is a subjective test based on the state of mind of the arresting officer.
May arrest without a warrant a person whom they reasonably suspect to be a terrorist. There is no need for urgency of an imminent act.
Fox, Campbell and Hartley v UK
Little ground for suspicion other than previous offences. The court said objective test required and not merely subjective to the arresting officer. Must be fact/information to convince the objective observer. It can never be so wide however, as to condone arbitrary police powers.
O'Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary
House of Lords suggested both objective and subjective elements to the test. A reasonable suspicion must be formed by the arresting officer himself and include information as part of a briefing.
O'Hara v UK
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
policing chapter 10: Policing and the law
Criminal Investigation Final
Arrest, Search and Seizure
Conducting Constitutional Searches ch 9
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
Limiting the Life of Private Trusts
Investing the Trust Patrimony
Contractual Liability to Third Parties
Breach of Trust: Lack of Care
OTHER QUIZLET SETS
tech. design terms
Linear Algebra (Math 341)
UPS Hub Management Job Methods
Eslick semester 1 EXAM