## Introduction

Summary trials deal with less serious criminal cases in magistrates’ courts. Cases are decided by a district judge (magistrates’ courts) or a bench of lay magistrates, without a jury. This contrasts with the Crown Court, where juries hear trials for indictable-only offences and either-way offences sent or elected there.

The process in the magistrates’ court is designed to be quick and proportionate, with tight case management and clear evidential rules. Most adult criminal cases start and finish in this court, so a firm handle on offence types, allocation, evidence, and appeals is essential.

Key law and guidance include the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, the Criminal Procedure Rules (CrimPR), the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003), the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (YJCEA 1999), the Sentencing Act 2020, and the Criminal Practice Directions.

## What You’ll Learn

- Which offences are heard summarily and how either-way offences are allocated
- The step-by-step process from first hearing to verdict and sentence
- How guilty plea credit works and when a Newton hearing may be needed
- Core evidence rules: confessions, hearsay, bad character, and expert opinion
- Case management duties under the Criminal Procedure Rules
- Appeal routes: Crown Court appeal, appeal by case stated, and judicial review
- Practical tips for defendants, representatives, and those preparing evidence

## Core Concepts

### Summary-only and either-way offences

- Summary-only offences are tried only in the magistrates’ court. Common examples include:
  - Road traffic offences (speeding, no insurance)
  - Drunk and disorderly conduct
  - Low-level public order matters
  - Common assault (non-aggravated)
- Either-way offences (for example, theft, criminal damage, certain assaults) can be tried either in the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court.
  - First, the court takes a plea.
  - If the plea is not guilty (or there is no acceptable plea), the court considers allocation based on seriousness, complexity, and sentencing powers.
  - If magistrates accept jurisdiction, the defendant may still elect Crown Court trial for an either-way offence.
  - If magistrates decline jurisdiction (too serious/complex), the case is sent to the Crown Court.

Single Justice Procedure (SJP) notices may be used for certain minor summary offences “on the papers”. If contested or if the defendant requests a hearing, the case is listed before magistrates in open court.

### Jurisdiction and sentencing powers

- Magistrates can impose:
  - Fines (often unlimited for certain offences; otherwise level-based or statutory maxima)
  - Disqualification from driving (for motoring offences)
  - Community orders
  - Short custodial sentences for adults (subject to statutory caps)
- Where sentencing powers are insufficient, magistrates may commit to the Crown Court for sentence.
- Separate youth court rules apply to under-18s; youth courts sit in the magistrates’ court with different powers and procedures.

Guilty plea credit follows Sentencing Council guidance: up to one-third reduction if the plea is indicated at the first stage of proceedings, tapering thereafter.

If there is a material dispute about facts after a guilty plea that would affect sentence, the court may hold a Newton hearing to resolve the difference.

### Burden and standard of proof

- The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- Defendants carry any statutory or evidential burdens relevant to specific defences (for example, a defence of reasonable excuse), which are usually on the balance of probabilities unless the statute states otherwise.
- Fair trial guarantees under Article 6 ECHR apply in the magistrates’ court.

### Evidence and admissibility

- Confessions: PACE s.76 sets the rules; confessions must not be obtained by oppression or in circumstances likely to render them unreliable.
- Exclusion of unfair evidence: PACE s.78 gives a discretion to exclude prosecution evidence if admitting it would have such an adverse effect on fairness that it ought not to be admitted.
- Hearsay: CJA 2003 provides limited gateways for hearsay (for example, witness unavailable for specific reasons under s.116, business records under s.117). Courts assess reliability and fairness before admitting hearsay.
- Bad character: CJA 2003 sets out gateways (for example, important explanatory evidence, propensity, or to correct a false impression). The court must consider the interests of justice.
- Written statements: CJA 1967 s.9 allows written statements in place of live evidence if formalities are met and the other party does not object.
- Expert evidence: CrimPR Part 19 and the Criminal Practice Directions require experts to set out methodology and limitations. Courts consider reliability and relevance (see cases such as R v Turner, R v Reed, and guidance applied from R v Bonython). Voice recognition and other specialist opinions require particular caution (see R v Atkins and Atkins).

### Case management in the magistrates’ court

- CrimPR Part 3 places a duty on the court and parties to prepare cases efficiently:
  - Early service of Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC)
  - Completion of Preparation for Effective Trial (PET) and magistrates’ court case management forms
  - Identification of issues, including any PACE, hearsay, or bad character applications
  - Directions for disclosure under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (CPIA), noting that formal defence statements are usually Crown Court matters
- CrimPR Part 24 covers trial and sentence in magistrates’ courts, including witness order, submissions of no case to answer, and verdict delivery.
- Special measures for vulnerable or intimidated witnesses may be granted under YJCEA 1999 (for example, screens, live link, intermediaries).

## Key Examples or Case Studies

- Case study 1: Common assault in a pub
  - Facts: The defendant pleads not guilty. The alleged victim attends; two friends do not.
  - Issues: Prosecution seeks to admit absent friends’ statements as hearsay under CJA 2003 s.116 (fear or cannot be found). Defence challenges reliability.
  - Outcome: One statement admitted, the other excluded due to inadequate attempts to secure attendance and thin supporting evidence. The court weighs live evidence and the admitted statement; verdict reached with reasons.
  - Takeaway: Hearsay is not automatic. The court will test necessity, reliability, and fairness.

- Case study 2: Shop theft with a contested confession
  - Facts: The defendant is interviewed without a solicitor. The tape shows repeated interruptions and pressure.
  - Issues: Defence makes a PACE s.76/78 application to exclude the confession for oppression and unreliability; prosecution argues it was voluntary.
  - Outcome: Confession excluded. With limited remaining evidence, the prosecution case is weak; no case to answer application succeeds.
  - Takeaway: Poor interview practice can derail a case. PACE compliance matters.

- Case study 3: Speeding alleged by camera
  - Facts: Defendant pleads not guilty, challenging device accuracy and compliance with statutory requirements.
  - Issues: Prosecution relies on a certificate and officer’s statement. Defence raises disclosure gaps and seeks to cross-examine on device checks.
  - Outcome: Court finds the statutory certificate valid and contemporaneous checks adequate; conviction follows. Mitigation leads to a short disqualification rather than a higher fine.
  - Takeaway: Technical challenges must be well-founded. Where the prosecution meets the statutory scheme, the court will rely on it.

## Practical Applications

- For defendants
  - Take legal advice early. Duty solicitors are available at court for many cases.
  - Respond promptly to a Single Justice Procedure notice. If you want a hearing, say so.
  - Bring documents to support mitigation (employment records, medical letters, evidence of repayment).
  - If pleading guilty, indicate at the first opportunity to maximise credit.
  - If pleading not guilty, identify the real issues early (for example, identity, intention, procedure) and keep to directions.

- For defence representatives
  - Seek disclosure early and record any failures. Use CrimPR to apply for directions where needed.
  - Flag PACE, hearsay, and bad character issues in advance. File short, focused skeleton arguments.
  - Consider a basis of plea or a Newton hearing if facts are disputed on a guilty plea.
  - Check sentencing powers. If insufficient, invite committal to the Crown Court for sentence where appropriate.
  - Costs: On acquittal, consider a defendant’s costs order. On conviction, advise clients about prosecution costs, surcharge, and compensation.

- For prosecutors
  - Serve clear IDPC: MG5 summary, key MG11 statements, exhibits, CCTV, and s.9 statements where suitable.
  - Address witness attendance early. If a witness cannot attend, consider hearsay gateways with supporting material.
  - Review and disclose material under CPIA 1996. Keep schedules up to date.
  - Apply in good time for bad character or special measures. Liaise with witnesses about practical needs.

- For witnesses and experts
  - Provide availability early. Experts should comply with CrimPR 19 and include methodology, range of opinion, and limitations.
  - Be ready to explain findings clearly and fairly under cross-examination.

- Appeals in outline
  - Appeal to the Crown Court against conviction and/or sentence after a not guilty plea is tried summarily; after a guilty plea, appeal is usually against sentence only. The appeal is a rehearing before a judge and two magistrates, without a jury.
  - Appeal by way of case stated to the King’s Bench Divisional Court on points of law or jurisdiction. Strict time limits apply.
  - Judicial review may be available for procedural errors where no adequate alternative remedy exists.
  - Outcomes can include confirming, varying, quashing, or remitting the case. Sentence can go up or down on a Crown Court appeal, within the applicable limits.

## Summary Checklist

- Confirm: summary-only or either-way; consider allocation and any right to elect Crown Court trial
- First hearing: take or indicate plea; raise bail, special measures, and legal aid
- Case management: complete PET form; identify issues, witnesses, and applications
- Evidence:
  - Confessions: PACE s.76 (voluntariness), s.78 (exclusion)
  - Hearsay: CJA 2003 gateways, reliability, fairness
  - Bad character: appropriate gateway and probative value
  - Written statements: CJA 1967 s.9 compliance
  - Expert opinion: CrimPR 19 and Practice Directions
- Trial: prosecution case, cross-examination, submissions, defence case (if any), closing, verdict with reasons
- Sentence: apply guideline ranges; guilty plea credit; consider committal if powers are insufficient
- Post-hearing: costs, surcharge, compensation, ancillary orders (e.g., restraining order, disqualification)
- Appeals: choose the correct route and file within time limits

## Quick Reference

| Topic              | Authority/Rule                       | Key point                                                                                     |
| ------------------ | ------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Allocation         | Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980; CrimPR | Either-way offences can be tried summarily if suitable; defendant may elect Crown Court trial |
| Confessions        | PACE s.76                            | Must be voluntary; exclude if oppression/unreliable                                           |
| Excluding evidence | PACE s.78                            | Court may exclude evidence to protect fairness                                                |
| Hearsay            | CJA 2003 ss.114–118                  | Limited gateways; assess reliability and fairness                                             |
| Bad character      | CJA 2003 ss.98–113                   | Gateways apply; probative value vs prejudice                                                  |


Summary Trial: Process, Procedure and Implications