R v Jenkins, Baldwin and Coombes

Date

15 September 1998

Legislation

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Keywords

search warrants; evidence

Counsel

Mr Clark

Solicitors

Unknown

Judge

Anthony King J

Court

Crown Court (Oxford)

Reported

Unreported

Summary

1) The information laid before the judge was insufficient to justify the issue of the warrant as it did not specify the grounds under which it was to be issued.

2) The warrant itself did not specify particular premises contrary to s.15(6)(a) PACE'84. There is no identification of names, persons or specific articles.

3) The warrant purports to permit a search for phonographic materials which are or are suspected to be in breach of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (CDPA) 1988, rather than limiting it to items in s.198(1)(a)(b) and (d) and s.198(3).

4) Two searches and seizures took place under one warrant and property was detained and listed by the CDPA instead of the police.

5) A warrant infringes on the rights of the citizen and therefore procedure must be adhered to. The warrant was not in accordance with s.16 PACE'84. Defects were substantial and significant and could not be excused by good faith on the part of the police.

• After his arrest, premises of Mr Jenkins were searched under s.18 PACE'84 but this is only permitted where the person is under arrest for an arrestable offence and CDPA gave no power of arrest. Therefore entry was illegal.

Decision

• The evidence was excluded under s.78 PACE'84 because of the combination of the breaches, together with the consequential disadvantage to the defence in relation to the reliability of the evidence obtained through these searches and seizures.