Change of Venue in Criminal Trials - R. v. Radich
![handle is hein.journals/vuwlr1 and id is 58 raw text is: CHANGE OF VENUE IN CRhIMINAL TRIALS
R. v. Radich [19521N.Z.L.R. 193.
At common law there is a jurisdiction in the Courts, where
it is absolutely necessary, to order a change of venue before a
criminal trial: R. v. Holden (1833), 5 B. & Ad. 347, 354; 110
E.R. 819, 821. In New Zealand the criminal law, both substantive
and procedural, has for the most part been codified by legis-
lation. The provisions for change of venue contained in the
Crimes Act 1908, S. 370 are considerably more liberal in the
discretion they confer upon the Judge in this matter than are
the rules of the common Taw IWhere .....it apears to u
of the Court that it is expedient for the ends of justice that..
The discretion so given at first sight appears to be absolute,
but it is, of course, subject to the conditions which the law
normally implies in the case of a judicial discretion, and in
two cases, R_. v. Beecher [19501 N.Z.L.R. 701 and R. v. Radich
[1952] 1I.Z.L.R. 195, the Court of Appeal has enquired into the
manner of its exercise. By the Criminal Appeal Act 1945, SS. 3
and 4: Any person convicted on indictment....may appeal ......
(a) Against his conviction on any ground of appeal which
involves a question of law alone..... The Court ..... shall allow
the appeal if it is of opinion ..... that on any ground there was a
miscarriage of justice..... This language is sufficiently wide
to be so construed as to admit of an appeal on the grounds of an
erroneous or improper decision not to grant a change of venue,
supposing that such a decision can be said to be erroneous or
improper. An application for a change of venue is an interloc-
utory application before trial in a criminal proceeding, but
this is no objection to appeal, for in certain English cases,
such as R. v. Gibbins and Proctor (1918) 13 Cr. App. R. 13, a
conviction following on the refusal of an application for
separate trials was the subject of appeal, and accordingly the
Court of Appeal in R. v. Beecher (supra) had little difficulty
in holding that it has power to entertain an appeal grounded on
an allegedly improper refusal to grant a change of venue.
The appeal in R. v. Beecher (supra) was allowed to the extent
of quashing the conviction and ordering a new trial, which the Court](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/vuwlr1&div=12&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Change of Venue in Criminal Trials - R. v. Radich
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most