R v Turner
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1970 |
| Year | 1970 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
Crime - Plea - Guilty - Not guilty plea entered - Counsel advising change of plea during trial - Propriety - Defendant's freedom of choice - Access between counsel and judge - Presence of defendant's solicitor - “Plea bargaining” - Whether improper.
The defendant pleaded not guilty at his trial on a charge of theft. He had previous convictions, and during an adjournment he was advised by his counsel in strong terms to change the plea; after having spoken to the trial judge, as the defendant knew, counsel advised that in his opinion a non-custodial sentence would be imposed if the defendant changed his plea whereas, if he persisted with the plea of not guilty, with an attack being made on police witnesses, and the jury convicted him there was a real possibility of a sentence of imprisonment being passed. Repeated statements were made to him that the ultimate choice of plea was his. He thought that counsel's views were those of the trial judge; nothing happened to show that they were not and the defendant changed his plea with the result that a formal verdict of guilty was returned.
On appeal against conviction, on the ground that the defendant did not have a free choice in retracting the plea of not guilty and pleading guilty:—
Held, allowing the appeal, that counsel could properly advise a defendant in strong terms to change his plea provided that it was made clear to him that the ultimate choice was freely his (post, p. 1096G); but that, if the advice was conveyed as that of someone who has seen the judge, a defendant should be disabused of any impression that the judge's views were being repeated (post, pp. 1096H–1097A–B); that as the defendant may have felt that the views expressed were those of the judge he could not be said to have had a free choice in changing his plea, and that, accordingly, the plea of guilty should be treated as a nullity and a venire de novo ordered.
Observations on “plea bargaining” (post, pp. 1097H–1098A–H).
The following case is referred to in the judgment:
Reg. v. Hall [
No additional cases were cited in argument.
APPEAL against conviction.
On January 26, 1970, at North East London Quarter Sessions (deputy chairman: Judge Basil Hobson), the appellant, Frank Richard Turner, was arraigned on an indictment charging him with theft contrary to section 1 of the
On January 27, 1970, after an adjournment, the indictment was again put to the appellant who then pleaded guilty, the jury formally returned a verdict of guilty and the appellant was fined £50 with four months' imprisonment in default of payment within four months, his licence was endorsed, and he was ordered to pay £75 towards the costs of the prosecution. The appellant applied for leave to appeal against conviction on grounds put forward by himself. Amended grounds of appeal were in the following terms:
“The appellant's mind did not go with his plea of guilty in that he at no time intended or wished to admit the offence charged, yet was induced to plead guilty on being advised by his counsel that having consulted with the learned trial judge in the matter of sentence, the appellant would definitely be sent to prison were he to proceed with his trial and be convicted, whereas by pleading guilty he would receive a small fine. In all the circumstances the appellant was deprived of a free choice of pleading guilty or not guilty and was deprived of his opportunity to put his defence before the jury.”
The facts are stated in the judgment.
Lewis Hawser Q.C. and Piers Herbert for the appellant.
John Hazan Q.C. and Michael Self for the Crown.
LORD PARKER C.J. gave the following judgment of the court. On January 26, 1970, at North East London Quarter Sessions, Mr. Turner, to whom the court has now granted leave to appeal and accordingly he will be referred to as the appellant, pleaded not guilty to the theft of a car. On January 27, he retracted the plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty, whereupon a formal verdict was taken from the jury and he was fined £50, with four months' imprisonment in default of payment within four months, his licence was endorsed, and he was ordered to pay £75 towards the cost of the prosecution.
It is in some ways a curious case, because this car was his own car, and to a layman no doubt that raises a curious conception. But what had happened was, on the prosecution's case (because in the light of the plea of guilty no evidence was, of course, called for the defence), the appellant had left...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Public Prosecutor v Knight Glenn Jeyasingam
... ... As observed by Baldwin and McConville, the central concern of the English Court of Appeal has been to regulate the practice of judges meeting with counsel in private prior to the trial. This can be seen in their decision in R v Turner [1970] 54 Cr App R 352 wherein the court emphasised that, while there must be freedom of access between counsel and judge, any discussion on plea should be made between the judge and both counsel for the defence and the prosecution. The court in Turner sought to discourage such discussions ... ...
-
Lee Eng Hock v Public Prosecutor
...SLR 857 (folld) Ganesun s/o Kannan v PP [1996] 3 SLR (R) 125; [1996] 3 SLR 560 (folld) R v Peace [1976] Crim LR 119 (refd) R v Turner [1970] 2 QB 321; [1970] 2 All ER 281 (distd) Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) ss 180 (b), 266, 267, 268, 269, 270 Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Ri......
-
Ramsay v R
...Rubens, [1970] 1 W.L.R. 800; [1970] 1 All E.R. 879; (1970), 54 Cr. App. R. 183; [1970] Crim. L.R. 104, distinguished. (3) R. v. Turner, [1970] 2 Q.B. 321; [1970] 2 All E.R. 281; (1970), 54 Cr. App. R. 352, distinguished. Legislation construed: Criminal Procedure Code (Law 13 of 1975), s.158......
- Chua Qwee Teck v PP
-
Table of cases
...1, 130 N.R. 277, 120 A.R. 161, 8 W.A.C. 161 ................................................................. 129, 176 R. v. Turner, [1970] 2 Q.B. 321, [1970] 2 All E.R. 281 (C.A.)............................. 179 R. v. Visitors to Inns of Court, Ex. P. Calder, [1994] Q.B. 1 (D.C.) ..............
-
Table of Cases, Volume 78, 2005
...3004 63R v Skinner 1994 99 CAR 212 63R v Smith (Morgan) [2001] 1 AC 146 162, 163R v Sutton, February 2005, CA (Crim) 57–60R v Turner [1970] 2 QB 321 164–166R v Z [2005] UKHL 35, HL 260–262R (Anderson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002]UKHL 46 354R (Hammond) v Secretary of S......
-
Mercy Killing, Partial Defences and Charge Decisions: 50 Shades of Grey
...to Compromise: Plea Bargaining, The Courts, and the Making of Political Authority (OUP, Oxford2007).78. Gerber (n 63) 212.79. Turner (1970) 2 Q B 321, Cain (1976) Criminal LR 464, Erice (1977) 66 Cr app R 16780. Rauxloh (n 53) 32.81. Section 144 Criminal Justice Act 2003.Clough circumstance......
-
Advising the Serious Organised Crime Agency: the role of the specialist prosecutors
...and thesentencing processDespite the noblest of motives, the judicial rejection ofplea bargaining by the Court of Appeal in R v Turner[1970] 2 QB 321 has done (in the author's view) con-siderable damage over the years. The criminal justicesystem has become overloaded by an increase inseriou......