Summary
Our client was charged alongside two other co-defendants with conspiracy to steal motor vehicles. However, our client had already previously been charged and sentenced regarding theft of motor vehicles. Managing Partner Stephen Halloran argued that it was an abuse of process for our client to be tried for the conspiracy charge due to his previous conviction where the charges were founded upon the same facts. Thanks to the strength of these representations, the prosecution offered no evidence and our client was found not guilty.
Details of the Case
A conspiracy is when two or more individuals make an agreement to commit a criminal act.
Previously, our client had been charged with the offence of conspiracy to steal motor vehicles when represented by a different firm of solicitors. However, this charge was later discontinued before he ever entered pleas, and he was instead charged with six offences relating to theft of motor vehicles. This means that he was not officially tried for the conspiracy charge on the first occasion.
Our client ultimately pleaded guilty to the six motor theft charges and was sentenced to 39 months in custody. After our client’s release from prison, he was again arrested and charged with conspiracy to steal motor vehicles alongside two other co-defendants relating to the same vehicle thefts.
Our Defence
Managing Partner Stephen Halloran represented our client in this matter. This was a very complex case given that there were over 50 stolen vehicles involved and the volume of evidence. After reviewing the Prosecution’s case and seeing that the charge related to the same thefts, Stephen prepared a robust abuse of process argument.
Stephen argued that it would be unjust for our client to be tried for this matter for the following reasons:
- It was the Prosecution’s own request to discontinue the conspiracy charge. Procedure therefore dictates that the Prosecution must formally apply to re-open the case, which they had not done.
- The Prosecution previously had the necessary evidence to prosecute our client. As there was no new evidence, prosecuting our client based on the same facts for which he had already been convicted would be oppressive.
- Our client was led to believe that pleading guilty to the theft charges would mean that the conspiracy would not be pursued. Due to this, our client pleaded guilty and served a prison sentence. It would be an outrage to the administration of justice for the Prosecution to go back on this position.
Court
Given that our client had already served a sentence for the motor vehicle thefts, the prospect of a second conviction and sentence was extremely distressing. As the value of the stolen vehicles amounted to over £1 million, our client could potentially have faced another prison sentence of up to seven years.
Thanks to the strength of Stephen’s representations, the Prosecution were forced to recognise that pursuing this charge against our client would be unjust and an abuse of process. As a result, the Prosecution offered no evidence against our client ahead of his trial and he was formally acquitted of the charge.
This was a fantastic outcome for our client and he was very grateful to Stephen for his expertise and guidance. This case highlights the importance of instructing experts in criminal defence. Without Stephen’s in-depth knowledge of legal proceedings and the administration of justice, our client may have unjustly faced a second conviction and sentence.
Looking for specialist criminal defence solicitors?
Have you been accused of a criminal offence? We understand how difficult this can be and the impact a criminal charge can have on your future. It’s extremely important to have trusted experts on your side to ensure all proceedings are handled justly and in accordance with legal directions.
At Lawtons, we have extensive experience in all areas of criminal law and are dedicated to securing the best possible outcome for our clients. If you need legal advice, please do not hesitate – contact a member of our specialist team today.
