Newton Hearing Definition

Case studies

"The forms and precedents section is essential so that I can quickly and easily look up provisions to include in templates or bespoke project contracts."

RWE

Access all documents on Newton Hearing

GET ACCESS NOW

GLOSSARY

/ˈnjuːt(ə)n/ /ˈhɪərɪŋ/

Published by a ��˾��ҹ�� Corporate Crime expert

What does Newton Hearing mean?

A hearing in criminal proceedings required when the defendant pleads guilty to an offence(s) but there is disagreement with the prosecution as to the material facts on which the defendant should be sentenced. This can occur when the accused pleads guilty on a specific basis that the prosecution does not accept.

During a newton hearing, evidence is called by both parties and the judge (sitting without a jury) or the magistrates decide the basis on which they will pass sentence. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to satisfy the court beyond reasonable doubt that their version of events is correct.

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Indications on sentence

Indications on sentence Judicial independence is fundamental to the rule of law. The integrity of the criminal justice system depends on a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal. Alongside these fundamental principles exists the need to ensure justice is carried out expeditiously and there is a recognised need for discussions on plea to take place. An advance indication as to likely sentence is part of this process. The potential advantage of gaining an indication on sentence in advance is that the defendant can make a better informed decision about whether to plead guilty or not. The Attorney General's guidelines on the acceptance of pleas emphasises the importance of transparency in the conduct of justice and, in particular, sets out a formalised process for the provision of indications on sentence in the Crown Court. These are generally known as 'Goodyear indications'. The Court of Appeal issued guidelines that amount to the introduction of a formalised procedure of advance sentence indication in R v Goodyear. These are...

Sentencing individuals for food safety and food hygiene offences

Sentencing individuals for food safety and food hygiene offences This Practice Note reviews the parts of the Sentencing Council’s offence-specific guidelines which are used by the magistrates’ courts and Crown Courts in England and Wales when sentencing individuals for food safety and food hygiene offences. In accordance with section 59 of the Sentencing Act 2020 (SA 2020) (known as the Sentencing Code), the courts must follow Sentencing Council guidelines in sentencing an offender unless ‘satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so’. The Sentencing Council has published offence-specific guidelines for food safety and hygiene offences. Separate guidelines apply for the sentencing of organisations for these offences, see Practice Note: Sentencing organisations for food safety and food hygiene offences. The Sentencing Council also publishes a number of overarching guidelines, which should be considered in respect of all sentencing exercises, see Practice Note: Sentences imposed following conviction. Among these, the General guideline—overarching principles (the General guideline) is specifically designed to be used in conjunction with offence-specific...

Discover our 12 Practice Notes on Newton Hearing

The Definitive Guideline on Reduction in Sentence for a Guilty Plea—what will change?

Corporate Crime analysis: When must a guilty plea be entered in order to receive a reduction in sentence? Chris Gillespie, barrister at 2 Hare Court, explains the new guideline from the Sentencing Council, and how it applies both to individuals and to corporate crime.

Victory for vishing victims

Corporate Crime analysis: On 21 September 2016, nine fraudsters were sentenced for up to seven years each and a total of 27 years for their part in a £113m vishing (voice phishing) scam. Narita Bahra, defence barrister at 2 Hare Court, represented one of the less culpable defendants and explains more.

Read the latest 2 News articles on Newton Hearing

Top

Trial

��˾��ҹ��

GLOSSARY