Appeals procedure - Grounds for appeal

Learning Outcomes

After studying this article, you will be able to identify and explain the main grounds for appeal in criminal proceedings, including errors of law, errors of fact, and procedural irregularities. You will understand how these grounds apply to appeals from the magistrates’ court and the Crown Court, and be able to apply the relevant legal principles to SQE1-style scenarios.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the appeals procedure in criminal cases, with a focus on the valid grounds for appeal and their practical application. In your revision, pay particular attention to:

• the main grounds for appeal against conviction and sentence in criminal cases
• the distinction between errors of law, errors of fact, and procedural irregularities
• how these grounds apply to appeals from the magistrates’ court and the Crown Court
• the requirements for fresh evidence and the concept of an “unsafe” conviction
• the procedural requirements for initiating an appeal and the possible outcomes

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. What are the three main grounds on which a criminal conviction may be appealed?
2. What does it mean for a conviction to be “unsafe” in the context of an appeal to the Court of Appeal?
3. Can a sentence be appealed simply because it is severe? What must be shown?
4. What is the difference between an error of law and an error of fact as a ground for appeal?

Introduction

Appeals are a key part of the criminal justice system, providing a mechanism to correct errors and ensure fairness. For SQE1, you must be able to identify the valid grounds for appeal in criminal cases, understand how they apply in practice, and recognise the procedural requirements for bringing an appeal. This article focuses on the main grounds for appeal—errors of law, errors of fact, and procedural irregularities—and how they operate in appeals from both the magistrates’ court and the Crown Court.

Grounds for Appeal: Overview

A party may appeal a conviction or sentence in a criminal case only if there are valid grounds. The main grounds for appeal are:

• error of law
• error of fact
• procedural irregularity

Each ground has specific requirements and consequences. The appellate court will only intervene if the error is significant enough to affect the safety of the conviction or the fairness of the sentence.

Key Term: error of law An error of law occurs when the trial court applies or interprets the law incorrectly, such as misdirecting the jury or misunderstanding a legal principle.

Key Term: error of fact An error of fact arises when the court makes a finding that is not supported by the evidence, or ignores relevant evidence, leading to an unjust outcome.

Key Term: procedural irregularity A procedural irregularity is a significant departure from the required legal process, such as a breach of the right to a fair trial, improper admission or exclusion of evidence, or judicial bias.

Appeals from the Magistrates’ Court: Grounds for Appeal

A defendant convicted or sentenced in the magistrates’ court may appeal to the Crown Court. The grounds for such an appeal include:

• the conviction is wrong in law or fact
• the sentence is wrong in law or manifestly excessive
• there was a procedural irregularity affecting the fairness of the proceedings

The Crown Court will rehear the case, considering both the law and the facts. Fresh evidence may be admitted if it is relevant and could not reasonably have been presented at the original trial.

Worked Example 1.1

A defendant is convicted in the magistrates’ court after pleading not guilty. He believes the magistrates misunderstood the law on self-defence. Can he appeal?

Answer: Yes. This is an error of law. The defendant may appeal to the Crown Court on the ground that the magistrates misapplied the law on self-defence, which could have affected the verdict.

Worked Example 1.2

A defendant pleads guilty in the magistrates’ court but receives a sentence he believes is too harsh. What must he show to appeal the sentence?

Answer: He must show that the sentence is wrong in law or manifestly excessive, for example, if the magistrates failed to apply the correct sentencing guidelines or ignored key mitigating factors.

Appeals from the Crown Court: Grounds for Appeal

A person convicted on indictment in the Crown Court may appeal to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). The main ground for appeal against conviction is that the conviction is “unsafe.” This may arise from:

• a misdirection of the jury (error of law)
• the wrongful admission or exclusion of evidence (procedural irregularity)
• juror misconduct or bias (procedural irregularity)
• a verdict not supported by the evidence (error of fact)
• fresh evidence that could have affected the outcome

For sentence appeals, the ground is that the sentence is wrong in law or manifestly excessive.

Key Term: unsafe conviction A conviction is unsafe if, due to an error of law, fact, or procedure, the appellate court is not satisfied that the conviction is reliable.

Worked Example 1.3

A defendant is convicted in the Crown Court. After trial, new evidence emerges that casts doubt on his guilt. What is the ground for appeal?

Answer: The ground is fresh evidence. If the new evidence is credible, admissible, and could have affected the verdict, the conviction may be found unsafe.

Errors of Law

Errors of law are a common ground for appeal. Examples include:

• the judge misdirecting the jury on the elements of the offence
• applying the wrong legal test (e.g., for recklessness or dishonesty)
• failing to follow binding precedent

If the error could have affected the outcome, the appellate court may quash the conviction or order a retrial.

Errors of Fact

Errors of fact occur when the verdict is not supported by the evidence, or the court ignores or misunderstands key facts. The appellate court will only intervene if the error renders the conviction unsafe.

Procedural Irregularities

A procedural irregularity is a serious breach of the rules governing criminal trials. Examples include:

• improper admission or exclusion of evidence
• denial of the right to call witnesses
• judicial bias or unfairness
• failure to disclose material evidence

If the irregularity affects the fairness of the proceedings or the safety of the conviction, it is a ground for appeal.

Exam Warning

The appellate court will not allow an appeal simply because it would have reached a different conclusion. There must be a significant error of law, fact, or procedure that affects the outcome.

Fresh Evidence

Fresh evidence may be a ground for appeal if:

• it is credible and relevant
• it was not available at trial and could not have been with reasonable diligence
• it could have affected the verdict

The appellate court will consider whether admitting the evidence is in the interests of justice.

Sentence Appeals

A sentence may be appealed if it is:

• wrong in law (e.g., exceeds the statutory maximum)
• manifestly excessive (disproportionate to the offence)
• passed without regard to relevant guidelines or mitigation

The appellate court may reduce the sentence or substitute a different one.

Summary

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The main grounds for appeal in criminal cases are error of law, error of fact, and procedural irregularity.
• Appeals from the magistrates’ court to the Crown Court may be based on errors of law, fact, or procedure.
• Appeals from the Crown Court to the Court of Appeal require showing that the conviction is unsafe or the sentence is wrong in law or manifestly excessive.
• Fresh evidence may be admitted on appeal if it is credible, relevant, and could have affected the outcome.
• The appellate court will only intervene if the error is significant enough to affect the safety of the conviction or the fairness of the sentence.

Key Terms and Concepts

• error of law
• error of fact
• procedural irregularity
• unsafe conviction