Bringing up a past case in a present case

Drexler

District court - if a past case ended in a dismissal of the case and no probation or conviction, yet a small fine was paid....can that be brought up by the DPP if in the district court again on an unrelated matter some years later?

Thanks in advance.

Victor

If a fine was paid, there was a conviction. If a donation was made to, say, the court poor box, I don't know.

Croc

I can't see how a case was dismissed and a fine was imposed, thats not possible.

Perhaps as Victor says it was dismissed under Section 1.1.1 Probation of Offenders Act provided a sum was paid to the court poor box or a charity. Then in that case it is not considered a conviction.

johnnyskeleton

Sometimes a judge will strike a case out and impose a fine or donation to a charity, but it is frowned upon and becomming less common.

Our man in Havana

I have come across cases where the judge finds the facts proven but does not convict. They usually direct a donation to charity or the matter can be re-entered.

hullaballoo

Drexler wrote: »

District court - if a past case ended in a dismissal of the case and no probation or conviction, yet a small fine was paid....can that be brought up by the DPP if in the district court again on an unrelated matter some years later?

Thanks in advance.

Only when it comes to sentencing. There's a rule against giving evidence of prior misconduct at the substantive trial. That means that the previous conviction will only be brought up when someone is convicted of the later offence and that only applies where the former offence gave rise to a conviction.

You do know you're not allowed to seek or give legal advice, right? I'm sure that you're not looking for legal advice but we can't be too sure.

Drexler

No I'm not seeking advice. I was just looking for a general answer on the issue. Thanks for your thoughts.

johnnyskeleton

hullaballú wrote: »

Only when it comes to sentencing. There's a rule against giving evidence of prior misconduct at the substantive trial. That means that the previous conviction will only be brought up when someone is convicted of the later offence and that only applies where the former offence gave rise to a conviction.

Or if you give evidence of your good character, or attack the character of a prosecution witness or (I always forget the third one).

Croc

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Or if you give evidence of your good character, or attack the character of a prosecution witness or (I always forget the third one).

But they would be only as a far as i know be able to give evidence of Previous Convictions and the OP never did clear up exactly what he meant in his original post