text:
Habeas corpus in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Habeas corpus (/ˈheɪbiəs ˈkɔːrpəs/) is a recourse in law challenging the reasons or conditions of a person's confinement under color of law. A petition for habeas corpus is filed with a court that has jurisdiction over the custodian, and if granted, a writ is issued directing the custodian to bring the confined person before the court for examination into those reasons or conditions.[1] The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which demands that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."
United States law affords persons the right to petition the federal courts for a writ of habeas corpus. Individual states also afford persons the ability to petition their own state court systems for habeas corpus pursuant to their respective constitutions and laws when held or sentenced by state authorities.
Federal habeas review did not extend to those in state custody until almost a century after the nation's founding. During the Civil War and Reconstruction, as later during the War on Terrorism, the right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus was substantially curtailed for persons accused of engaging in certain conduct. In reaction to the former, and to ensure state courts enforced federal law, a Reconstruction Act for the first time extended the right of federal court habeas review to those in the custody of state courts (prisons and jails), expanding the writ essentially to all imprisoned on American soil. The federal habeas statute that resulted, with substantial amendments, is now at 28 U.S.C. § 2241. For many decades, the great majority of habeas petitions reviewed in federal court have been filed by those imprisoned in federal prisons by state courts for state crimes (e.g., murder, rape, robbery, etc.), since in the American system, crime has historically been a matter of state law.
The privilege of habeas corpus is not a right against unlawful arrest, but rather a right to be released from imprisonment after such arrest. If one believes the arrest is without legal merit and subsequently refuses to come willingly, he still may be guilty of resisting arrest, which can sometimes be a crime in and of itself (even if the initial arrest itself was illegal) depending on the state.
Contents
[hide]
1 Origin
2 Federal law
3 Suspension during the Civil War
3.1 Presidential suspension of habeas corpus
3.2 Congressional suspension of habeas corpus
3.3 In the Confederacy
4 Suspension during Reconstruction
5 Suspension in the Philippines
6 Habeas corpus during World War II
7 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
8 Habeas corpus in the 21st Century
9 Differences in post-trial actions
10 Federal habeas corpus statistics
10.1 Number of cases
10.2 Types of cases in which petitions are filed
10.3 Success rates
10.4 Disposition time
10.5 Filing rates
11 References
12 Further reading
13 External links
Origin[edit]
Habeas corpus derives from the English common law where the first recorded usage was in 1305, in the reign of King Edward I of England. The procedure for the issuing of writs of habeas corpus was first codified by the Habeas Corpus Act 1679, following judicial rulings which had restricted the effectiveness of the writ. A previous act had been passed in 1640 to overturn a ruling that the command of the Queen was a sufficient answer to a petition of habeas corpus. Winston Churchill, in his chapter on the English Common Law in The Birth of Britain, explains the process thus:
Only the King had a right to summon a jury. Henry [II] accordingly did not grant it to private courts ... But all this was only a first step. Henry also had to provide means whereby the litigant, eager for royal justice, could remove his case out of the court of his lord into the court of the King. The device which Henry used was the royal writ ... and any man who could by some fiction fit his own case to the wording of one of the royal writs might claim the King's justice.
The writ of habeas corpus was issued by a superior court in the name of the Monarch, and commanded the addressee (a lower court, sheriff, or private subject) to produce the prisoner before the Royal courts of law. Petitions for habeas corpus could be made by the prisoner himself or by a third party on his behalf, and as a result of the Habeas Corpus Acts could be made regardless of whether the court was in session, by presenting the petition to a judge.
The 1679 Act remains important in 21st century cases. This Act and the historical body of British practice that relies upon it has been used to interpret the habeas rights granted by the United States Constitution, while taking into account the understanding of the writ held by the framers of the Constitution.
Federal law[edit]
The Suspension Clause of Article I does not expressly establish a right to the writ of habeas corpus; rather, it prevents Congress from restricting it. There has been much scholarly debate over whether the Clause positively establishes a right under the federal constitution, merely exists to prevent Congress from prohibiting state courts from granting the writ, or protects a pre-existing common law right enforceable by federal judges.[2] However, in the cases of Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr (2001),[3] and Boumediene v. Bush (2008)[4] the U.S. Supreme Court suggested that the Suspension Clause protects "the writ as it existed in 1789," that is, as a writ which federal judges could issue in the exercise of their common law authority.
Regardless of whether the writ is positively guaranteed by the constitution, habeas corpus was first established by statute in the Judiciary Act of 1789. This statutory writ applied only to those held in custody by officials of the executive branch of the federal government and not to those held by state governments, which independently afford habeas corpus pursuant to their respective constitutions and laws. From 1789 until 1866, the federal writ of habeas corpus was largely restricted to prisoners in federal custody, at a time when no direct appeals from federal criminal convictions were provided for by law. Habeas corpus remained the only means for judicial review of federal capital convictions until 1889, and the only means for review of federal convictions for other "infamous crimes" until 1891.[5] Until 1983[clarification needed] the writ of habeas corpus remained the only way that decisions of military courts could be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
The authority of federal courts to review the claims of prisoners in state custody was not clearly established until Congress adopted a statute (28 U.S.C. § 2254)[6] granting federal courts that authority in 1867, as part of the post-Civil War Reconstruction. The U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Waley v. Johnson (1942)[7] interpreted this authority broadly to allow the writ to be used to challenge convictions or sentences in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights where no other remedy was available.
The U.S. Congress grants federal district courts, the Supreme Court, and all Article III federal judges, acting in their own right, jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241[8] to issue writs of habeas corpus to release prisoners held by any government entity within the country from custody, subject to certain limitations, if the prisoner –
Is in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States or is committed for trial before some court thereof; or
Is in custody for an act done or omitted in pursuance of an Act of Congress, or an order, process, judgment or decree court or judge of the United States; or
Is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States; or
Being a citizen of a foreign state and domiciled therein is in custody for an act done or omitted under any alleged right, title, authority, privilege, protection, or exemption claimed under the commission, order or sanction of any foreign state, or under color thereof, the validity and effect of which depend upon the law of nations; or
It is necessary to bring said persons into court to testify or for trial.
In 1950s and 1960s, decisions by the Warren Court greatly expanded the use and scope of the federal writ largely due to the "constitutionalizing" of criminal procedure by applying the Bill of Rights, in part, to state courts using the incorporation doctrine. This afforded state prisoners many more opportunities to claim that their convictions were unconstitutional, which provided grounds for habeas corpus relief. In the last thirty years, decisions by the Burger and Rehnquist Courts have somewhat narrowed the writ. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) further limited the use of the federal writ by imposing a one-year statute of limitations and dramatically increasing the federal judiciary's deference to decisions previously made in state court proceedings either on appeal or in a state court habeas corpus action.
One of AEDPA's most controversial changes is the requirement that any constitutional right invoked to vacate a state court conviction rooted in a mistake of law by the state court must have "resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States." Thus, a U.S. Court of Appeals must ignore its own precedents and affirm a state court decision contrary to its precedents, if the U.S. Supreme Court has never squarely addressed a particular issue of federal law.[9]
Suspension during the Civil War[edit]
Presidential suspension of habeas corpus[edit]
On April 27, 1861, the right of habeas corpus was unilaterally suspended by President Abraham Lincoln in Maryland during the American Civil War. Lincoln had received word that anti-war Maryland officials intended to destroy the railroad tracks between Annapolis and Philadelphia, which was a vital supply line for the army preparing to fight the south. (Indeed, soon after, the Maryland legislature would simultaneously vote to stay in the Union and to close these rail lines, in an apparent effort to prevent war between its northern and southern neighbors.[10]) Lincoln did not issue a sweeping order; it only applied to the Maryland route.[11] Lincoln chose to suspend the writ over a proposal to bombard Baltimore, favored by his General-in-Chief Winfield Scott.[12] Lincoln was also motivated by requests by generals to set up military courts to rein in his political opponents, "Copperheads," or Peace Democrats, so named because they did not want to resort to war to force the southern states back into the Union, as well as to intimidate those in the Union who supported the Confederate cause. Congress was not yet in session to consider a suspension of the writs; however, when it came into session it failed to pass a bill favored by Lincoln to sanction his suspensions.[13] During this period one sitting U.S. Congressman from the opposing party, as well as the mayor, police chief, entire Board of Police, and the city council of Baltimore were arrested without charge and imprisoned indefinitely without trial.[14]
Lincoln's action was rapidly challenged in court and overturned by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Maryland (led by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Roger B. Taney) in Ex Parte Merryman. Chief Justice Taney ruled the suspension unconstitutional, stating that only Congress could suspend habeas corpus.[15] Lincoln and his Attorney General Edward Bates not only ignored the Chief Justice's order,[16] but when Lincoln's dismissal of the ruling was criticized in an editorial by prominent Baltimore newspaper editor Frank Key Howard, they had the editor also arrested by federal troops without charge or trial. Ironically, the troops imprisoned Howard, who was Francis Scott Key's grandson, in Fort McHenry, which, as he noted, was the same fort where the Star Spangled Banner had been waving "o'er the land of the free" in his grandfather's song.[17] (In 1863, Howard wrote about his experience as a "political prisoner" at Fort McHenry in the book Fourteen Months in the American Bastille;[17] two of the publishers selling the book were then arrested.[14])
When Congress convened in July 1861 it failed to support Lincoln's unilateral suspension of habeas corpus. A joint resolution was introduced into the Senate to approve of the president's suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, but filibustering by Senate Democrats, who did not support it, and opposition to its imprecise wording by Sen. Lyman Trumbull prevented a vote on the resolution before the end of the first session, and the resolution was not taken up again.[18] Sen. Trumbull himself introduced a bill to suspend habeas corpus, but failed on getting a vote before the end of the first session.[19]
Shortly thereafter, on September 17, 1861, the day the Maryland legislature was to reconvene, Lincoln imprisoned one third of the members of the Maryland General Assembly without charges or hearings in further defiance of the Chief Justice's ruling.[20] Thus, the legislative session had to be cancelled.[10]
On February 14, 1862, the war was firmly in progress and Lincoln ordered most prisoners released,[21] putting an end to court challenges for the time being. He again suspended habeas corpus on his own authority in September that same year, however, in response to resistance to his calling up of the militia.[22]
Congressional suspension of habeas corpus[edit]
When Congress met again in December 1862, the House of Representatives passed a bill indemnifying the president for his suspension of habeas corpus.[23] The Senate amended the bill,[24] and the compromise reported out of the conference committee altered it to remove the indemnity and to suspend habeas corpus on Congress's own authority.[25] That bill, the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, was signed into law March 3, 1863.[26] Lincoln exercised his powers under it in September, suspending habeas corpus throughout the Union in any case involving prisoners of war, spies, traitors, or military personnel,[27] The suspension of habeas corpus remained in effect until Andrew Johnson revoked it on December 1, 1865.[28]
General Ambrose E. Burnside had former-Congressman Clement Vallandigham arrested in May 1863 for continuing to express sympathy for the Confederate cause after having been warned to cease doing so. Vallandigham was tried by a military tribunal and sentenced to two years in a military prison. Lincoln quickly commuted his sentence to banishment to the Confederacy. Vallandigham appealed his sentence, arguing that the Enrollment Act did not authorize his trial by a military tribunal rather than in ordinary civilian courts, that he was not ordinarily subject to court martial, and that Gen. Burnside could not expand the jurisdiction of military courts on his own authority. The Supreme Court did not address the substance of Vallandigham's appeal, instead denying that it possessed the jurisdiction to review the proceedings of military tribunals without explicit congressional authorization.[29]
In 1864, Lambdin P. Milligan and four others were accused of planning to steal Union weapons and invade Union prisoner-of-war camps and were sentenced to hang by a military court. However, their execution was not set until May 1865, so they were able to argue the case after the war ended. In Ex parte Milligan (1866),[30] the U.S. Supreme Court decided that Congress's 1863 suspension of the writ did not empower the President to try to convict citizens before military tribunals where the civil courts were open and operational. This was one of the key Supreme Court Cases of the American Civil War that dealt with wartime civil liberties and martial law.
In the Confederacy[edit]
In the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis also suspended habeas corpus and imposed martial law.[31] This was in part to maintain order and spur industrial growth in the South to compensate for the economic loss inflicted by its secession.
Suspension during Reconstruction[edit]
Main article: Civil Rights Act of 1871
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (July 2011)
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Proclamation 201
Following the end of the Civil War, numerous groups arose in the South to oppose Reconstruction, including the Ku Klux Klan. In response, Congress passed the Enforcement Acts in 1870–71. One of these, the Civil Rights Act of 1871, permitted the president to suspend habeas corpus if conspiracies against federal authority were so violent that they could not be checked by ordinary means. That same year, President Ulysses S. Grant suspended the writ of habeas corpus in nine South Carolina counties;[32] the Act's sunset clause ended that suspension with the close of the next regular session of Congress.
Suspension in the Philippines[edit]
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (July 2011)
In response to continuing unrest, the Philippine Commission availed itself of an option in the Philippine Organic Act of 1902, 32 Stat. 692, and on January 31, 1905, requested that Governor-General Luke Edward Wright suspend the writ of habeas corpus. He did so the same day, and habeas corpus was suspended until he revoked his proclamation on October 15, 1905.[33][34] The suspension gave rise to the United States Supreme Court case Fischer v. Baker, 203 U.S. 174 (1906).
Habeas corpus during World War II[edit]
Immediately following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the governor of Hawaii, Joseph Poindexter, invoked the Hawaiian Organic Act, 31 Stat. 141 (1900), suspended habeas corpus, and declared martial law. Hawaii was governed by Lieutenant Generals Walter Short, Delos Emmons, and Robert C. Richardson, Jr. for the remainder of the war. In Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 327 U.S. 304 (1946), the United States Supreme Court held that the declaration of martial law did not permit the trial of civilians in military tribunals for offenses unrelated to the military (in this case, public drunkenness).
In 1942, eight German saboteurs, including two U.S. citizens, who had secretly entered the United States to attack its civil infrastructure as part of Operation Pastorius were convicted by a secret military tribunal set up by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. In Ex parte Quirin (1942),[35] the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the writ of habeas corpus did not apply, and that the military tribunal had jurisdiction to try the saboteurs, due to their status as unlawful combatants.
The period of martial law in Hawaii ended in October 1944. It was held in Duncan v. Kahanamoku (1946)[36] that although the initial imposition of martial law in December 1941 may have been lawful, due to the Pearl Harbor attack and threat of imminent invasion, by 1944 the imminent threat had receded and civilian courts could again function in Hawaii. The Organic Act therefore did not authorize the military to continue to keep civilian courts closed.
After the end of the war, several German prisoners held in American-occupied Germany petitioned the District Court for the District of Columbia for a writ of habeas corpus. In Johnson v. Eisentrager (1950)[37] the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the American court system had no jurisdiction over German war criminals who had been captured in Germany, and had never entered U.S. soil.
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act[edit]
In 1996, following the Oklahoma City bombing, Congress passed (91–8 in the Senate, 293–133 in the House) and President Clinton signed into law the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). The AEDPA was intended to "deter terrorism, provide justice for victims, provide for an effective death penalty, and for other purposes." The AEDPA introduced one of the few limitations on habeas corpus. For the first time, its Section 101 set a statute of limitations of one year following conviction for prisoners to seek the writ. The Act limits the power of federal judges to grant relief unless the state court's adjudication of the claim has resulted in a decision that
Is contrary to, or has involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or
Has resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceeding.
It barred second or successive petitions generally but with several exceptions. Petitioners who had already filed a federal habeas petition were required first to secure authorization from the appropriate United States Court of Appeals, to ensure that such an exception was at least facially made out.
Habeas corpus in the 21st Century[edit]
The November 13, 2001, Presidential Military Order purported to give the President of the United States the power to detain non-citizens suspected of connection to terrorists or terrorism as enemy combatants. As such, that person could be held indefinitely, without charges being filed against him or her, without a court hearing, and without legal counsel. Many legal and constitutional scholars contended that these provisions were in direct opposition to habeas corpus, and the United States Bill of Rights and, indeed, in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004)[38] the U.S. Supreme Court re-confirmed the right of every American citizen to access habeas corpus even when declared to be an enemy combatant. The Court affirmed the basic principle that habeas corpus could not be revoked in the case of a citizen.
In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)[39] Salim Ahmed Hamdan petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging that the military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay "violate both the UCMJ and the four Geneva Conventions." In a 5-3 ruling the Court rejected Congress's attempts to strip the court of jurisdiction over habeas corpus appeals by detainees at Guantánamo Bay. Congress had previously passed the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 which stated in Section 1005(e), "Procedures for Status Review of Detainees Outside the United States":
(1) Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(2)The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on any claims with respect to an alien under this paragraph shall be limited to the consideration of whether the status determination ... was consistent with the standards and procedures specified by the Secretary of Defense for Combatant Status Review Tribunals (including the requirement that the conclusion of the Tribunal be supported by a preponderance of the evidence and allowing a rebuttable presumption in favor of the Government's evidence), and to the extent the Constitution and laws of the United States are applicable, whether the use of such standards and procedures to make the determination is consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States.
On September 29, the U.S. House and Senate approved the Military Commissions Act of 2006, a bill which suspended habeas corpus for any alien determined to be an "unlawful enemy combatant engaged in hostilities or having supported hostilities against the United States"[40][41] by a vote of 65-34. (This was the result on the bill to approve the military trials for detainees; an amendment to remove the suspension of habeas corpus failed 48-51.[42]) President Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) into law on October 17, 2006. With the MCA's passage, the law altered the language from "alien detained ... at Guantanamo Bay":
Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination." §1005(e)(1), 119 Stat. 2742.
The Supreme Court ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that the MCA amounts to an unconstitutional encroachment on habeas corpus rights, and established jurisdiction for federal courts to hear petitions for habeas corpus from Guantanamo detainees tried under the Act.[43] Under the MCA, the law restricted habeas appeals for only those aliens detained as enemy combatants, or awaiting such determination. Left unchanged was the provision that, after such determination is made, it is subject to appeal in federal courts, including a review of whether the evidence warrants the determination. If the status was upheld, then their imprisonment was deemed lawful; if not, then the government could change the prisoner's status to something else, at which point the habeas restrictions no longer applied.
Wikinews has related news: President Bush signed into law the Military Commissions Act of 2006
There is, however, no legal time limit which would force the government to provide a Combatant Status Review Tribunal hearing. Prisoners were, but are no longer, legally prohibited from petitioning any court for any reason before a CSRT hearing takes place.
In January 2007, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee that in his opinion: "There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There's a prohibition against taking it away." He was challenged by Sen. Arlen Specter who asked him to explain how it is possible to prohibit something from being taken away, without first being granted.[44] Robert Parry wrotes in the Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel:
Applying Gonzales's reasoning, one could argue that the First Amendment doesn't explicitly say Americans have the right to worship as they choose, speak as they wish or assemble peacefully. Ironically, Gonzales may be wrong in another way about the lack of specificity in the Constitution's granting of habeas corpus rights. Many of the legal features attributed to habeas corpus are delineated in a positive way in the Sixth Amendment ...[45]
The Department of Justice has taken the position in litigation that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 does not amount to a suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed in a 2-1 decision,[46] on February 20, 2007,[47] which the U.S. Supreme Court initially declined to review. The U.S. Supreme Court then reversed its decision to deny review and took up the case in June 2007. In June 2008, the court ruled 5-4 that the act did suspend habeas and found it unconstitutional.[48]
On June 7, 2007, the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007 was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee with an 11–8 vote split along party lines, with all but one Republican voting against it.[49] Although the Act would restore statutory habeas corpus to enemy combatants, it would not overturn the provisions of the AEDPA which set a statute of limitations on habeas corpus claims from ordinary civilian federal and state prisoners.[citation needed]
On June 11, 2007, a federal appeals court ruled that Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, a legal resident of the United States, could not be detained indefinitely without charge. In a two-to-one ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the Court held the President of the United States lacks legal authority to detain al-Marri without charge; all three judges ruled that al-Marri is entitled to traditional habeas corpus protections which give him the right to challenge his detainment in a U.S. Court.
In July 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that "if properly designated an enemy combatant pursuant to the legal authority of the President, such persons may be detained without charge or criminal proceedings for the duration of the relevant hostilities."[50]
On October 7, 2008, U.S. District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina ruled that 17 Uyghurs, Muslims from China's northwestern Xinjiang region, must be brought to appear in his court in Washington, DC, three days later: "Because the Constitution prohibits indefinite detentions without cause, the continued detention is unlawful."[51]
On January 21, 2009, President Barack Obama issued an executive order regarding the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and the individuals held there. This order stated that the detainees "have the constitutional privilege of the writ of habeas corpus."[52]
Regarding U.S. Citizens accused of supporting terrorism, senator Lindsey Graham has stated before the senate, "When they say, 'I want my lawyer,' you tell them: 'Shut up. You don't get a lawyer. You are an enemy combatant, and we are going to talk to you about why you joined Al Qaeda.'"
– U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, 2011[53]
Following the December 1, 2011, vote by the United States Senate to reject an NDAA amendment proscribing the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens, the ACLU has argued that the legitimacy of Habeas Corpus is threatened: "The Senate voted 38-60 to reject an important amendment [that] would have removed harmful provisions authorizing the U.S. military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians, including American citizens, anywhere in the world... We're disappointed that, despite robust opposition to the harmful detention legislation from virtually the entire national security leadership of the government, the Senate said 'no' to the Udall amendment and 'yes' to indefinite detention without charge or trial."[54] The New York Times has stated that the vote leaves the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens "ambiguous," with some senators including Carl Levin and Lindsey Graham arguing that the Supreme Court had already approved holding Americans as enemy combatants, and other senators, including Dianne Feinstein and Richard Durbin, asserting the opposite.[55]
On April 20, 2015, a New York Supreme Court justice issued an order to "show cause & writ of habeas corpus" in a proceeding on behalf of two chimpanzees used in research at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. The justice, Barbara Jaffe, amended her order later in the day by striking the reference to habeas corpus.[56][57]
Differences in post-trial actions[edit]
Habeas corpus is an action often taken after sentencing by a defendant who seeks relief for some perceived error in his criminal trial. There are a number of such post-trial actions and proceedings, their differences being potentially confusing, thus bearing some explanation. Some of the most common are an appeal to which the defendant has as a right, a writ of certiorari, a writ coram nobis and a writ of habeas corpus.
An appeal to which the defendant has a right cannot be abridged by the court which is, by designation of its jurisdiction, obligated to hear the appeal. In such an appeal, the appellant feels that some error has been made in his trial, necessitating an appeal. A matter of importance is the basis on which such an appeal might be filed: generally appeals as a matter of right may only address issues which were originally raised in trial (as evidenced by documentation in the official record). Any issue not raised in the original trial may not be considered on appeal and will be considered waived via estoppel. A convenient test for whether a petition is likely to succeed on the grounds of error is confirming that
a mistake was indeed made
an objection to that mistake was presented by counsel and
that mistake negatively affected the defendant's trial.
A writ of certiorari, otherwise known simply as cert, is an order by a higher court directing a lower court to send record of a case for review, and is the next logical step in post-trial procedure. While states may have similar processes, a writ of cert is usually only issued, in the United States, by the Supreme Court, although some states retain this procedure. Unlike the aforementioned appeal, a writ of cert is not a matter of right. A writ of cert will have to be petitioned for, the higher court issuing such writs on limited bases according to constraints such as time. In another sense, a writ of cert is like an appeal in its constraints; it too may only seek relief on grounds raised in the original trial.
A petition for a writ of error coram nobis or error coram vobis challenges a final judgment in a criminal proceeding. Use of this type of petition varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but is usually limited to situations where it was not possible to raise this issue earlier on direct appeal. These petitions focus on issues outside the original premises of the trial, i.e., issues that require new evidence or those that could not otherwise be raised by direct appeal or writs of cert.[58] These often fall in two logical categories: (1) that the trial lawyer was ineffectual or incompetent or (2) that some constitutional right has been violated.
Federal habeas corpus statistics[edit]
Number of cases[edit]
In 2004, there were about 19,000 non-capital federal habeas corpus petitions filed and there were about 210 capital federal habeas corpus petitions filed in U.S. District Court. The vast majority of these were from state prisoners, not from those held in federal prisons. There are about 60 habeas corpus cases filed in the U.S. Supreme Court's original jurisdiction each year. The U.S. Courts of Appeal do not have original jurisdiction over habeas corpus petitions.
Types of cases in which petitions are filed[edit]
In 1992, less than 1% of federal habeas corpus petitions involved death penalty sentences, although 21% involved life sentences. At that time about 23% had been convicted of homicide, about 39% had been convicted of other serious violent crimes, about 27% had been convicted of serious non-violent crimes, and about 12% were convicted of other offenses. These are almost exclusively state offenses and thus petitions filed by state prisoners.
Exhaustion of state-court remedies often takes five to ten years after a conviction, so only state prisoners facing longer prison sentences are able to avail themselves of federal habeas corpus rights without facing a summary dismissal for failure to exhaust state remedies. The lack of state remedies to exhaust also means that the timeline for federal death penalty habeas review is much shorter than the timeline for state death penalty habeas review (which can drag on literally for decades).
In 2004, the percentage of federal habeas corpus petitions involving state death sentences was still about 1% of the total.
Success rates[edit]
About 63% of issues raised in habeas corpus petitions by state court prisoners are dismissed on procedural grounds at the U.S. District Court level, and about 35% of those issues are dismissed based on the allegations in the petition on the merits (on the merits has a different meaning than what it's used for here). About 2% are either "remanded" to a state court for further proceedings (which poses an interesting problem of federalism – the federal court usually issues a writ to the state prison to release the prisoner, but only if the state court does not hold a certain proceeding within a certain time), or, far less frequently, resolved favorably to the prisoner on the merits outright. About 57% of habeas corpus issues dismissed on procedural grounds in 1992 were dismissed for a failure to exhaust state remedies.
Success rates are not uniform, however. James Liebman, Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, stated in 1996 that his study found that when habeas corpus petitions in death penalty cases were traced from conviction to completion of the case that there was "a 40 percent success rate in all capital cases from 1978 to 1995."[59] Similarly, a study by Ronald Tabek in a law review article puts the success rate in habeas corpus cases involving death row inmates even higher, finding that between "1976 and 1991, approximately 47% of the habeas petitions filed by death row inmates were granted."[60] Most habeas corpus petitioners in death penalty cases are represented by attorneys, but most habeas corpus petitioners in non-death penalty cases represent themselves. This is because federal funds are not available to non-capital state habeas petitioners to pay for attorneys unless there is good cause, there being no federal right to counsel in such matters. However, in state capital cases, the federal government provides funding for the representation of all capital habeas petitioners.
Thus, about 20% of successful habeas corpus petitions involve death penalty cases.
These success rates predate major revisions in habeas corpus law that restricted the availability of federal habeas corpus relief when AEDPA was adopted in 1996, over a decade ago. Post-AEDPA, the great disparity in success rates remains, however, with the federal courts' overturning of state capital cases a major reason that many states have been unable to carry out a majority of capital sentences imposed and have long backlog lists.
Disposition time[edit]
The time required to adjudicate habeas corpus petitions varies greatly based upon factors including the number of issues raised, whether the adjudication is on procedural grounds or on the merits, and the nature of the claims raised.
In 1992, U.S. District Courts took an average of two and a half years to adjudicate habeas corpus petitions in death penalty cases raising multiple issues that were resolved on the merits, about half of that time-length for other multiple issue homicide cases, and about nine months in cases resolved on procedural grounds.
AEDPA was designed to reduce the disposition times of federal habeas corpus petitions. But AEDPA has a little impact in non-capital cases, where a majority of cases are dismissed on procedural grounds, very few prisoners prevail and most prisoners are not represented by attorneys. The disposition time in capital cases has actually increased 250% from the time of AEDPA's passage to 2004.
Filing rates[edit]
In 1991, the average number of federal habeas corpus petitions filed in the United States was 14 per 1,000 people in state prison, but this ranged greatly from state to state from a low of 4 per 1,000 in Rhode Island to a high of 37 per 1,000 in Missouri.
The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) produced a brief surge in the number of habeas corpus filings by state prisoners, as deadlines imposed by the act encouraged prisoners to file sooner than they might have otherwise done so, but this had run its course by 2000, and by 2004, habeas corpus petition filing rates per 1,000 prisoners was similar to pre-AEDPA filing rates.
There was a temporary surge in habeas corpus petitions filed by federal prisoners in 2005 as a result of the Booker decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.[61]
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Larson, Aaron. "What is Habeas Corpus". ExpertLaw.com. Retrieved 1 May 2017.
Jump up ^ See Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction, Section 15.2 (5th ed. 2007)
Jump up ^ 533 U.S. 289 (2001)
Jump up ^ 553 U.S. 723 (2008)
Jump up ^ "FindLaw - Cases and Codes". findlaw.com.
Jump up ^ 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jump up ^ 316 U.S. 101 (1942)
Jump up ^ 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jump up ^ "FindLaw - Cases and Codes". findlaw.com.
^ Jump up to: a b "Teaching American History in Maryland – Documents for the Classroom: Arrest of the Maryland Legislature, 1861". Maryland State Archives. 2005. Archived from the original on January 11, 2008. Retrieved February 6, 2008.
Jump up ^ Goodwin, Doris Kearns Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln (2005) ISBN 0-684-82490-6 p.354-355
Jump up ^ Neely, p.7
Jump up ^ George Clarke Sellery, Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus as viewed by Congress (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 1907), 11–26.
^ Jump up to: a b "A time liberties weren't priority". tribunedigital-baltimoresun.
Jump up ^ 17 F. Cas. 144(C.C.D. Md. 1861)
Jump up ^ Goodwin, p. 355
^ Jump up to: a b Howard, F. K. (Frank Key) (1863). Fourteen Months in American Bastiles. London: H.F. Mackintosh. Retrieved 18 August 2014.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, Thirty-Seventh Congress, First Session (1861), pp. 40–50, 64–71, 127, 137–44, 177, 180, 208, 217, 220, 234–35, 288–97, 332–36, 391–95, 451–54.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, Thirty-Seventh Congress, First Session (1861), pp. 336–43, 364, 372–82.
Jump up ^ William C. Harris, Lincoln and the Border States: Preserving the Union (University Press of Kansas, 2011) p 71
Jump up ^ Amnesty to Political or State Prisoners
Jump up ^ Proclamation 94.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, Thirty-Seventh Congress, Third Session (1862–63), pp. 14, 20–22.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, Thirty-Seventh Congress, Third Session (1862–63), pp. 529–54.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, Thirty-Seventh Congress, Third Session (1862–63), pp. 1354–58, 1435–38, 1459–79, 1489–94, 1532.
Jump up ^ Pub. L. 37-81, 12 Stat. 755.
Jump up ^ Proclamation 104.
Jump up ^ Proclamation 148.
Jump up ^ Ex parte Vallandigham, 68 U.S. (1 Wall.) 243 (1864).
Jump up ^ 71 U.S. 2 (1866).
Jump up ^ Heidler, D.S., Heidler, J.T., Coles, D.J., Encyclopedia of the American Civil War: a political, social and military history (2000) ISBN 0-393-04758-X p.441
Jump up ^ Proclamation 201
Jump up ^ Fisher v. Baker , 203 U.S. 174, 179–81 (U.S. Supreme Court 1906). .
Jump up ^ "Habeas Corpus Suspension". onecl. , n1784.
Jump up ^ 317 U.S. 1 (1942)
Jump up ^ 327 U.S. 304 (1946)
Jump up ^ 339 U.S. 763 (1950)
Jump up ^ 542 U.S. 507 (2004)
Jump up ^ 548 U.S. 557 (2006)
Jump up ^ "Bill Text - 109th Congress (2005-2006) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)". loc.gov.
Jump up ^ Klein, Rick (29 September 2006). "Senate's passage of detainee bill gives Bush a win: Democrats say GOP capitulate". Boston Globe.
Jump up ^ "Bill Summary & Status - 109th Congress (2005 - 2006) - S.AMDT.5087 - THOMAS (Library of Congress)". loc.gov.
Jump up ^ https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-1195.pdf
Jump up ^ San Francisco Chronicle, Gonzales says the Constitution doesn't guarantee habeas corpus, January 24, 2007
Jump up ^ "Gonzales Questions Habeas Corpus". baltimorechronicle.com.
Jump up ^ "Object not found!" (PDF). uscourts.gov.
Jump up ^ Al Odah v. United States, 476 F.3d 981 (D.C. Cir. 2007)
Jump up ^ Greenhouse, Linda (2008-06-13). "Justices, 5-4, Back Detainee Appeals for Guantánamo". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-06-19.
Jump up ^ "Panel OKs Bill For Guantanamo Detainees". CBS News. 2007-06-07. Archived from the original on 2007-06-14. Retrieved 2008-06-30.
Jump up ^ "Al-Marri and the power to imprison U.S. citizens without charges". Salon.com. 2008-07-16. Retrieved 2008-07-16.
Jump up ^ "U.S. judge orders Chinese Muslims at Guantanamo freed". Reuters. October 8, 2008.
Jump up ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2009-01-30. Retrieved 2009-01-27.
Jump up ^ Savage, Charlie (1 December 2001). "Senate Declines to Clarify Rights of American Qaeda Suspects Arrested in U.S." The New York Times.
Jump up ^ Khaki, Ategah (29 November 2011). "Senate Rejects Amendment Banning Indefinite Detention". ACLU Blog of Rights.
Jump up ^ Savage, Charlie (1 December 2011). "Senate Declines to Clarify Rights of American Qaeda Suspects Arrested in U.S." The New York Times.
Jump up ^ "Apes are people too? NY judge grants human rights to chimpanzees". rt.com. 2015-04-21. Retrieved 2015-04-22.
Jump up ^ Grimm, David (2015-04-20). "Updated: Judge's ruling grants legal right to research chimps". Retrieved 2015-04-22.
Jump up ^ Smith, Kyle (29 December 2015). "Habeas Corpus Petitions in California State Court". Retrieved 13 March 2016.
Jump up ^ "Habeas Corpus Studies". 1 April 1996 – via NYTimes.com.
Jump up ^ "Readings - The New Speed-Up In Habeas Corpus Appeals - The Execution - FRONTLINE - PBS". pbs.org.
Jump up ^ "Page Not Found". uscourts.gov. Archived from the original on 2007-07-05.
Federal Habeas Corpus Review (United States Department of Justice 1995)
Federal Habeas Corpus Relief (Congressional Research Service 2006)
Further reading[edit]
Wert Justin J. Habeas Corpus in America: The Politics of Individual Rights (University Press of Kansas; 2011) 296 pages; how presidents, Congress, interest groups, legal scholars, and others have shaped it.
External links[edit]
Media related to Habeas corpus in the United States at Wikimedia Commons
Petition for Habeas Corpus April 16, 1843 From Texas Tides
[show]
v
t
e
Criminal procedure (investigation)
Criminal investigation
Arrest warrant
Search warrant
Probable cause
Knock-and-announce
Exigent circumstance
Reasonable suspicion
Search and seizure
Search of persons
Arrest
Detention
Right to silence
Miranda warning
Arguido
Suspect
Criminal prosecution
Statute of limitations
Nolle prosequi
Bill of attainder
Precognition
Grand jury
Indictment
Ex post facto law
Criminal jurisdiction
Deferred prosecution agreement
Extradition
Habeas corpus
Bail
Inquisitorial system
Adversarial system
Charges and pleas
Alford plea
Arraignment
Information
Indictment
Plea
Peremptory plea
Nolo contendere
Plea bargain
Presentence investigation
Related areas
Criminal defenses
Criminal law
Evidence
Legal abuse
Criminal justice portal
Law portal
Wiktionary
Wikibooks
Wikiquote
WikiSource
Wikimedia Commons
Wikinews
Wikiversity
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Habeas_corpus_in_the_United_States&oldid=843291826"
Categories:
United States habeas corpus law
Hidden categories:
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from September 2009
Articles to be expanded from July 2011
All articles to be expanded
Articles using small message boxes
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from September 2007
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
Add links
This page was last edited on 28 May 2018, at 05:11.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: b

value: span

values:
/wiki/Suspension_Clause
mw-redirect
Suspension Clause

values: Article One of the United States Constitution

values:
/wiki/War_on_Terrorism
mw-redirect
War on Terrorism

values:
/wiki/English_Common_Law
mw-redirect
English Common Law

values: A History of the English Speaking Peoples

values: Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr

values:
/wiki/United_States_Supreme_Court
mw-redirect
United States Supreme Court

values: The text near this tag may need clarification or removal of jargon. (September 2009)

values:
noprint Inline-Template
margin-left:0.1em; white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Incorporation_doctrine
mw-redirect
Incorporation doctrine

values:
/wiki/Warren_Burger
mw-redirect
Warren Burger

values: Edit section: Suspension during the Civil War

values: Edit section: Presidential suspension of habeas corpus

values: Commanding General of the United States Army

values:
/wiki/Copperheads_(politics)
mw-redirect
Copperheads (politics)

values:
/wiki/Henry_May_(Maryland)
mw-redirect
Henry May (Maryland)

values:
/wiki/Star_Spangled_Banner
mw-redirect
Star Spangled Banner

values: Edit section: Congressional suspension of habeas corpus

values: United States congressional conference committee

values:
/wiki/Habeas_Corpus_Suspension_Act_1863
mw-redirect
Habeas Corpus Suspension Act 1863

values:
/wiki/Ambrose_E._Burnside
mw-redirect
Ambrose E. Burnside

values:
/wiki/Military_tribunal
mw-redirect
Military tribunal

values:
/wiki/Commutation_of_sentence
mw-redirect
Commutation of sentence

values: Supreme Court Cases of the American Civil War

values: Edit section: Suspension during Reconstruction

values:
/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1871
mw-redirect
Civil Rights Act of 1871

values: plainlinks metadata ambox mbox-small-left ambox-content

values:
/wiki/Sunset_clause
mw-redirect
Sunset clause

values: Edit section: Suspension in the Philippines

values:
nofollow
external text
http://legislink.org/us/stat-32-692

values: List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 203

values: Edit section: Habeas corpus during World War II

values:
nofollow
external text
http://legislink.org/us/stat-31-141

values:
/wiki/Delos_Emmons
mw-redirect
Delos Emmons

values:
/wiki/Robert_C._Richardson,_Jr.
mw-redirect
Robert C. Richardson, Jr.

values: List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 327

values: Edit section: Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act

values: Edit section: Habeas corpus in the 21st Century

values: Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism

values:
/wiki/Enemy_combatants
mw-redirect
Enemy combatants

values:
/wiki/Salim_Ahmed_Hamdan
mw-redirect
Salim Ahmed Hamdan

values:
/wiki/George_W._Bush_administration
mw-redirect
George W. Bush administration

values:
/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detainment_camp
mw-redirect
Guantanamo Bay detainment camp

values:
/wiki/Detainee_Treatment_Act_of_2005
mw-redirect
Detainee Treatment Act of 2005

values: wikinews:President Bush signed into law the Military Commissions Act of 2006

values:
/wiki/Senate_Judiciary_Committee
mw-redirect
Senate Judiciary Committee

values: Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (September 2007)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

values:
/wiki/Uyghur_people
mw-redirect
Uyghur people

values: float: right; clear: right; margin: 0.5em 0 0.8em 1.4em; width:40%; padding: 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa; font-size: 88%; background-color: #F9F9F9;

values: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

values: State University of New York at Stony Brook

values: Edit section: Differences in post-trial actions

values: Edit section: Federal habeas corpus statistics

values: Edit section: Types of cases in which petitions are filed

values:
/wiki/Death_penalty
mw-redirect
Death penalty

values:
/wiki/Congressional_Globe
mw-redirect
Congressional Globe

values: s:Amnesty to Political or State Prisoners

values: List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 68

values: Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States

values: List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 71

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/NDAA

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: commons:Category:Habeas corpus in the United States

values: Template talk:Criminal procedure (investigation)

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible collapsed navbox-inner

values: Category:United States habeas corpus law

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing clarification from September 2009

values: Category:Articles to be expanded from July 2011

values: Category:Articles using small message boxes

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from September 2007

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Habeas_corpus_in_the_United_States rootpage-Habeas_corpus_in_the_United_States skin-vector action-view


text:
Driving licence in the United Kingdom
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Driving licence in the United Kingdom
Example of a driving licence in the United Kingdom
Issued by
United Kingdom
Type of document
Driving licence
Purpose
Authorisation
In the United Kingdom, a driving licence is the official document which authorises its holder to operate motor vehicles on highways and other public roads. It is administered in England, Scotland and Wales by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) and in Northern Ireland by the Driver & Vehicle Agency (DVA). A driving licence is required in England, Scotland, and Wales for any person driving a vehicle on any highway or other "road", as defined in s.192 Road Traffic Act 1988,[1] irrespective of the ownership of the land over which the road passes. Similar requirements apply in Northern Ireland under the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981. As long as Great Britain and Northern Ireland remains within the European Union, the driving licence in the United Kingdom is a European driving licence.
As UK nationals do not normally have identity cards, a photographic driving licence can serve many of the purposes of an identity card in non-driving contexts, such as proof of identity (e.g. when opening a bank account) or of age (e.g. when buying age-restricted goods such as alcohol).
Some confusion surrounds the British spelling of licence, which is derived from the Latin licentia, and the associated variations thereof. Licence is the only acceptable spelling of the document (noun), but verbal forms of the word are spelled with an "s". Licensed is used for the state of holding a licence, licensing is the correct form for the process of issuing or obtaining a licence, and licensee for a person holding a licence[2] (although 'driving licence holder' is the term generally used in this context).[3] In the American orthography, all variants are of the c and subsequent s form.
Contents
[hide]
1 Regulations
1.1 Provisional licences and learner drivers
1.2 Newly qualified drivers
1.3 Towing restrictions
1.4 Other regulations
2 History
3 Driving licence categories
3.1 Current categories
3.2 Obsolete goods classes
4 Points and endorsements
5 Driving licence codes
6 Use as proof of identity
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
Regulations[edit]
See also: United Kingdom driving test
Provisional licences and learner drivers[edit]
Applications for a provisional driving licence can be made in the UK from the age of 15 years and 9 months. Once a United Kingdom driving test has been passed, the driving licence is valid for driving a moped or light quad bike from age 16, and a car from age 17, or 16 for those who receive, or have applied for, the higher or enhanced rate of the mobility component of PIP or DLA.[4][5] A driving test consists of three sections: theory, hazard perception and a supervised driving examination. Until this test has been passed, a driver may hold only a provisional licence[6] and is subject to certain conditions.
The conditions attached to provisional licences for a particular category of vehicle are:[7]
L plate
D plate (Wales)
Learner driver plates in the UK.
L-plates or (in Wales only) D-plates (Welsh: Dysgwr) must be conspicuously displayed on the front and rear of the vehicle.
Learner drivers of a particular category and transmission type of vehicle must be accompanied by somebody aged 21 or above who has held a full driving licence for that category and transmission type for at least three years, except in the case of solo motorcycles and vehicles of certain categories designed solely for one person.
No trailer may be towed, except when driving a tractor or where a full licence gives provisional entitlement to drive a car with trailer, large goods vehicle with trailer or passenger carrying vehicle with trailer.
Motorcycle riders must not carry any pillion passengers.
Coach or bus drivers must not carry any passenger except a person giving or receiving instruction.
Motorways must not be used by holders of car and motorcycle provisional licences,[8] excluding category B (car) licence holders who are learner drivers for the purposes of the trailer category BE.
R plate that must be displayed by restricted drivers in Northern Ireland.
In Northern Ireland, learner drivers are limited to a speed of 45 mph (72 km/h), and drivers who have passed their test within the previous year must display R plates (restricted) and are also limited to a speed of 45 mph (72 km/h) until the expiry of the restricted period. R plates are similar in style to L plates, with a thick-set dark orange R displayed on a white background.[9]
After passing a driving test, the provisional licence may be surrendered within two years in exchange for a full UK licence[6] for the relevant kind of vehicle. Full car licences allow use of mopeds and motorcycles provided a CBT (Compulsory Basic Training) course is completed (the requirement to have a CBT in Northern Ireland was introduced on 21 February 2011).[10]
Newly qualified drivers[edit]
There are no restrictions on newly qualified drivers in England, Wales or Scotland, but if a newly qualified driver receives six penalty points within two years of passing, the licence is automatically cancelled and the driver must pass the full test again.[11] These six points remain on the new licence until their designated expiry time.[12]
Towing restrictions[edit]
The rules on what a driver can tow are different depending on when they passed their driving test. If they passed their car driving test on or after 1 January 1997, they may drive a car or van up to 3,500 kg maximum authorised mass (MAM) towing a trailer of up to 750 kg MAM, and they may tow a trailer over 750 kg MAM as long as the combined MAM of the trailer and towing vehicle is no more than 3,500 kg MAM when loaded. They must pass the car and trailer driving test to tow anything heavier. If a driver passed their car test before 1 January 1997, they are usually allowed to drive a vehicle and trailer combination up to 8,250 kg MAM. They are also allowed to drive a minibus with a trailer over 750 kg MAM.[13]
Other regulations[edit]
Motor car licences issued in the United Kingdom distinguish between automatic and manual transmission vehicles, depending on whether or not a driving test was passed in a vehicle with manual transmission (unless a vehicle test was taken in the UK before such distinction was made). While a manual transmission vehicle licence permits the holder to drive a vehicle of either kind, an automatic transmission vehicle licence is solely for vehicles with automatic transmission. The licence also shows whether a driver requires glasses or contact lenses to meet the legal driving requirements, if known.
Drivers who obtained rights to drive category D1 minibuses before 1997 (by passing a test for the obsolete class A) must not drive such vehicles for hire or reward, nor accept any form of payment in money, goods or kind from any passengers carried.
There is no maximum age for driving or holding a driving licence, but holders must renew their licences at age 70 and every three years thereafter, at which times they must self-certify their continued fitness to drive.[14]
Forklift trucks require a separate licence, issued by third-party training companies rather than the DVLA or DSA.[15]
The DVLA has included Welsh on driving licences issued in Wales for many years. But requests for Scots Gaelic (also an official language in the UK) to be included on licences issued to drivers resident in Scotland have so far been rejected.
The Union Flag has been included on UK licences since July 2015.[16]
History[edit]
Driver registration was introduced in 1903 with the Motor Car Act. Holders of the sulphur-yellow coloured document were entitled to "drive a motor car or motor cycle".[17] The wording was changed in 1930 after which holders were allowed to "drive or steer a motor car or to drive a motor cycle". Shortly afterwards, the document cover was changed to a dark red colour. Holders were for a period entitled to drive a vehicle of "any class or description".[17] Subsequent changes saw the document list precisely those vehicle types for which holders were licensed.
Competency tests were introduced by the Motor Vehicles Regulations 1935 applicable to all drivers who started driving after 1 April 1934 . Competency tests were suspended in 1939 for seven years due to the Second World War and in 1956 for one year due to the Suez Crisis. The only person in the United Kingdom who is not required to have a driving licence in order to drive is The Queen.[18] She also does not require number plates on any vehicles which are personally owned by herself or her closest family members.[19]
Until 1973, driving licences (and tax discs) were issued by local authorities and had to be renewed every three years. In 1971, the decision was taken to computerise the licensing system to enable it to be linked to the Police National Computer and to extend the life of the licence up to the driver's 70th birthday, extendable at intervals thereafter provided the driver can prove fitness.
Except for Northern Ireland, driving licences issued before July 1998 did not have photographs on them.[20] Anyone who holds a licence issued before this date may retain their photo-less licence until expiry (normally one's seventieth birthday) or until they change address, whichever comes sooner. The new plastic photocard driving licences have to be renewed every ten years, for a fee. Until 2015, the licence consisted of both the photocard and a paper counterpart which detailed the individual's driving entitlements and convictions ("endorsements"). The counterpart was abolished on 8 June 2015[21] and the information formerly recorded on it is now available online via the View Driving Licence service, except in Northern Ireland where the counterpart must be kept with the photocard.[22]
Licences issued to residents of England, Northern Ireland and Scotland appear only in English, while those issued to residents of Wales appear in both English and Welsh.
Each licence holder in England, Scotland and Wales has a unique driver number, which is 16 characters long. The characters are constructed in the following way:[23]
1–5: The first five characters of the surname (padded with 9s if fewer than 5 characters). For surnames beginning with "MAC", they are treated as "MC" for all.[24]
6: The decade digit from the year of birth (e.g. for 1987 it would be 8)
7–8: The month of birth in two digit format (7th character is incremented by 50 if driver is female i.e. 51–62 instead of 01–12)
9–10: The date within the month of birth in two digit format (i.e. 01-31)
11: The year digit from the year of birth (e.g. for 1987 it would be 7)
12–13: The first two initials of the first names, padded with a 9 if no middle name
14: Arbitrary digit – usually 9, but decremented to differentiate drivers with the first 13 characters in common
15–16: Two computer check digits.
17–18: Appended, two digits representing the licence issue, which increases by 1 for each licence issued.
Each Northern Ireland licence holder has a unique driver number which is 8 characters long. The characters are not constructed in any particular pattern.
Driving licence categories[edit]
Current categories[edit]
This is a list of the categories that might be found on a driving licence in the United Kingdom.[25]
Category
Vehicle type
Minimum age
Notes[Notes 1]
AM
Mopeds 16 2-wheeled or 3-wheeled vehicles with a maximum design speed of over 25 km/h (15.5 mph) but not more than 45 km/h (28 mph).
This category also includes light quadricycles with an unladen mass of not more than 350 kg (not including batteries if it is an electric vehicle) and a maximum design speed of over 25 km/h (15.5 mph) but not more than 45 km/h (28 mph).
P
Mopeds 16 Motor vehicles with fewer than 4 wheels with a maximum design speed of over 45 km/h (28 mph) but not more than 50 km/h (31 mph). Its engine size must not be more than 50cc if powered by an internal combustion engine.
Q
Mopeds 16 Motor vehicles with fewer than 4 wheels which, if propelled by an internal combustion engine, have a cylinder capacity not exceeding 50cc and, if not equipped with pedals by means of which the vehicle is capable of being propelled, have a maximum design speed not exceeding 25 km/h (15.5 mph).
A1
Motorcycles 17 Light motorbicycles with an engine size up to 125cc, a power output of up to 11 kW (14.75 hp), and a power to weight ratio not more than 0.1 kW/kg (136.2 hp/ton). This category also includes motor tricycles with power output up to 15 kW (20.1 hp).
A2
Motorcycles 19 Motorbicycles in category A1, as well as motorbicycles with a power output up to 35 kW (46.9 hp) and power to weight ratio not more than 0.2 kW/kg (272.5 hp/ton). The motorcycle must also not be derived from a vehicle of more than double its power.
A
Motorcycles 24[Notes 2] Motorcycles in categories A1 and A2, as well as motorcycles with a power output more than 35 kW (46.9 hp) or a power to weight ratio more than 0.2 kW/kg (272.5 hp/ton) and motor tricycles with a power output more than 15 kW (20.1 hp).
B1
Light vehicles and quadricycles 17[Notes 3] Motor vehicles with 4 wheels up to 400 kg unladen, or 550 kg if they are designed for carrying goods.
B
Cars 17[Notes 4] Full licence obtained before 1 January 1997:
A vehicle and trailer combination up to 8,250 kg maximum authorised mass (MAM).
A minibus with a trailer over 750 kg MAM.
Full licence obtained after 31 December 1996:
Vehicles up to 3,500 kg MAM with up to 8 passenger seats (with a trailer up to 750 kg). Also covers heavier trailers if the total MAM of the vehicle and trailer is not more than 3,500 kg.
Motor tricycles with a power output higher than 15 kW if driver is over 21 years old.
Physically disabled drivers with provisional category B entitlement will also have provisional entitlement to ride category A1 or A motor tricycles. Able-bodied drivers can no longer ride motor tricycles with a provisional category B licence.
B auto
Cars 17[Notes 5] As Category B, but only automatic transmission.
BE
Cars 17[Notes 6] A vehicle with a MAM of 3,500 kg with a trailer. The size of the trailer depends on the BE ‘valid from’ date shown on the licence. If the date is before 19 January 2013, vehicle can tow any size trailer. If the date is on or after 19 January 2013, vehicle can tow a trailer with a MAM of up to 3,500 kg.
C1
Medium-sized vehicles 18[Notes 7] Vehicles between 3,500 and 7,500 kg MAM (with a trailer up to 750 kg).
C1E
Medium-sized vehicles 21[Notes 8] C1 category vehicles with a trailer over 750 kg. The combined MAM of both cannot exceed 12,000 kg.
C
Large vehicles 21[Notes 9] Vehicles over 3,500 kg (with a trailer up to 750 kg MAM).
CE
Large vehicles 21[Notes 9] Category C vehicles with a trailer over 750 kg.
D1
Minibuses 21[Notes 10] Vehicles with no more than 16 passenger seats, a maximum length of 8 metres, and a trailer up to 750 kg. See also Category B.
D1E
Minibuses 21[Notes 10] D1 category vehicles with a trailer over 750 kg MAM. The combined MAM of both cannot exceed 12,000 kg.
D
Buses 24[Notes 10] Any bus with more than 8 passenger seats (with a trailer up to 750 kg MAM).
DE
Buses 24[Notes 10] D category vehicles with a trailer over 750 kg.
f
Agricultural tractor 16 Maximum weight with trailer = 24 390 kg. Age 16 for tractors less than 2.45m wide. It must only pull trailers less than 2.45 m (96 in) wide with two wheels, or four close-coupled.
G
Road roller 21[Notes 11]
H
Tracked vehicles 21[Notes 12]
k
Mowing machine or pedestrian-controlled vehicle 16
l
Electrically-propelled vehicle 17 Category now deprecated – tests no longer available (since 2001) for this category. Vehicles now fit into category B1 or B.
M
Trolley vehicles
n
Exempt from duty N/A Category now deprecated – tests no longer available (since 2001) for this category. Vehicles now fit into category B1 or B.
Notes
Jump up ^ MAM = Maximum authorised mass
Jump up ^ Age 24 or 2 years from date of A2 test pass.
Jump up ^ At age 16, a licence may be issued if the licensee is in receipt of the higher rate of disability living allowance. However, if the rate is withdrawn, the normal minimum age for driving a car (17 years) applies.
Jump up ^ At age 16, a licence may be issued if the licensee is in receipt of the higher rate of disability living allowance. However if the rate is withdrawn, the normal minimum age for driving a car (17 years) applies.
Jump up ^ At age 16, a licence may be issued if the licensee is in receipt of the higher rate of disability living allowance. However, if the rate is withdrawn, the normal minimum age for driving a car (17 years) applies.
Jump up ^ If the driver has passed their category B or B automatic test before 1 January 1997, their licence will already show C1, C1E (8.25 tonnes), D1, D1E (not for hire or reward) as entitlement flowing from the category B.
Jump up ^ Age 17 if the driver is a member of the armed services
Jump up ^ Age 17 if the driver is a member of the armed services; Age 18 if they got their driving licence before 10 September 2009 and the weight of the vehicle and trailer together is under 7,500 kg; Age 18 under certain other circumstances
^ Jump up to: a b Age 17 if the driver is a member of the armed services; Age 18 under certain other circumstances
^ Jump up to: a b c d Age 17 if the driver is a member of the armed services; Age 18 having passed a passenger carrying vehicle (PCV) test before 10 September 2008 and driving under a authorised operator's licence (O-licence), or minibus permit, or community bus permit and under certain conditions; Age 18 under certain other circumstances; Age 20 after passing a PCV driving test and Driver Certificate of Professional Competence (DCPC) initial qualification
Jump up ^ Age 17 for small road-rollers with metal or hard rollers. They must not be steam powered, weigh more than 11.69 tonnes or be made for carrying loads
Jump up ^ Age 17 if the Maximum Authorised Mass of the tracked vehicle doesn't exceed 3,500 kg
Obsolete goods classes[edit]
Although the category system was changed over 20 years ago (1 January 1997), the freight industry and driver recruitment agencies [26] still predominently use the obsolete class numbers for the entitlement of HGV drivers.
The two systems are not exactly compatible, so the descriptions given are only a guideline.
Class 1: any goods vehicle over 7½ long tons (7,620 kg) with any trailer.
Class 2: any rigid goods vehicle over 7½ long tons.
Class 3: any rigid goods vehicle over 7½ long tons with no more than two axles.
Points and endorsements[edit]
Main article: List of UK driving licence endorsements
The UK uses a cumulative points system for driving offences. Points are deducted for driving offences by law courts, and the licence is endorsed accordingly. A UK driving licence may be endorsed by the courts for various offences, not only for those committed while driving or in charge of a vehicle. These are usually recorded by changing the second digit of the endorsement code (usually to 2, 4, 6 or 9).[27] If the individual committing the offence does not hold a valid driver's licence the endorsements may be put by until a licence is held.
Most endorsements remain valid for four years; some (such as driving under the influence) are recorded on the licence for 11 years because more severe penalties apply to those convicted twice within 10 years of drink or drug driving offences.
Twelve points on the licence within three years makes the driver liable to disqualification under the "totting-up" procedure; however this is not automatic and must be decided on by a court of law.[28][29] Endorsements remain on the licence for four years, rather than three, to ensure that offences are not removed while still legally applicable.
Driving licence codes[edit]
Certain codes are included on driving licences to indicate restrictions on use. These codes are listed on the back of the card under the column headed "12. Codes" and are listed for each category that is licensed.
As long as the UK remains within the EU, these codes are the same than those for the EU, currently defined by DIRECTIVE 2006/126/EC.
The codes and their meanings are as follows:[30]
01 – eyesight correction
02 – hearing/communication aid
10 – modified transmission
15 – modified clutch
20 – modified braking systems
25 – modified accelerator systems
30 – combined braking and accelerator systems
35 – modified control layouts
40 – modified steering
42 – modified rear-view mirror(s)
43 – modified driving seats
44 – modifications to motorcycles
44 (1) – single operated brake
44 (2) – (adjusted) hand operated brake (front wheel)
44 (3) – (adjusted) foot operated brake (back wheel)
44 (4) – (adjusted) accelerator handle
44 (5) – (adjusted) manual transmission and manual clutch
44 (6) – (adjusted) rear-view mirror(s)
44 (7) – (adjusted) commands (direction indicators, braking light, etc.)
44 (8) – seat height allowing the driver, in sitting position, to have 2 feet on the road at the same time
45 – motorcycles only with sidecar
46 – tricycles only (for licences issued before 29 June 2014)
70 – exchange of licence
71 – duplicate of licence
78 – restricted to vehicles with automatic transmission
79 – restricted to vehicles in conformity with the specifications stated in brackets on the licence
79.02 – restricted to category AM vehicles of the 3-wheel or light quadricycle type
79.03 – restricted to tricycles
96 – allowed to drive a vehicle and trailer where the trailer weighs at least 750 kg, and the combined weight of the vehicle and trailer is between 3,500 kg and 4,250 kg
97 – not allowed to drive category C1 vehicles which are required to have a tachograph fitted
101 – not for hire or reward (that is, not to make a profit)
102 – drawbar trailers only
103 – subject to certificate of competence
105 – vehicle not more than 5.5 metres long
106 – restricted to vehicles with automatic transmissions
107 – not more than 8,250 kilogrammes
108 – subject to minimum age requirements
110 – limited to transporting persons with restricted mobility
111 – limited to 16 passenger seats
113 – limited to 16 passenger seats except for automatics
114 – with any special controls required for safe driving
115 – organ donor
118 – start date is for earliest entitlement
119 – weight limit(s) for vehicle do(es) not apply
121 – restricted to conditions specified in the Secretary of State's notice
122 – valid on successful completion: Basic Moped Training Course
125 – tricycles only (for licences issued before 29 June 2014)
Use as proof of identity[edit]
See also: Identity Cards Act 2006
Identity cards for UK nationals were introduced in 2009 on a voluntary basis, and the attempt to introduce a nationwide identity-card scheme in 2010 was reversed mid-course. Its in-progress database was halted and then destroyed.[citation needed] Only workers in certain high-security professions, such as airport workers, were required to have an identity card in 2009, and this remains the case today. Therefore, driving licences, particularly the photocard driving licence introduced in 1998, along with passports, are the most widely used ID documents in the United Kingdom. Most people do not carry their passports with them; this leaves driving licences as the only valid form of ID to be presented. In day-to-day life, most authorities do not arbitrarily ask for identification from individuals, although this may become a concern in instances of stop and search.[citation needed]
Non-professional drivers are not legally obliged to carry a driving licence while driving, but section 164 of the Road Traffic Act 1998[31] allows a police officer to require a driver to produce a driving licence within seven days at a police station chosen by the driver. The form which was once issued in such circumstances, the HO/RT 1, was known colloquially as "a producer", as exemplified in Smiley Culture's hit single "Police Officer".[32]
See also[edit]
European driving licence
British passport
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "s.192 Road Traffic Act 1988 – General Interpretation of Act". Legislation.gov.uk. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/licence
Jump up ^ as - for example - at "Statistical data set Driving licence holding and vehicle availability (NTS02)". Gov.uk. Retrieved 10 August 2017.
Jump up ^ "Provisional Driving Licence". Young Car Driver. Retrieved 6 October 2014.
Jump up ^ "Direct.gov Motoring". Direct.gov.uk. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
^ Jump up to: a b "Road Traffic Act 1988 s.89". Statutelaw.gov.uk. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ "Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 reg. 16" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 31 October 2008. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ Motorways Traffic (England and Wales) Regulations 1982 reg. 11 ISBN 0-11-027163-7
Jump up ^ "Motor vehicle documentation learner and restricted driver requirements". Nidirect.gov.uk. 4 October 2009. Archived from the original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
Jump up ^ "Statutory Rules of Northern Ireland DVA website" (PDF). doeni.gov.uk. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 August 2012.
Jump up ^ "Road Traffic (New Drivers) Act 1995, ss.1 to 4". Statutelaw.gov.uk. Archived from the original on 2012-08-05. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ "Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, s.45(5)". Statutelaw.gov.uk. 1992-01-07. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ "Towing with a car". Government of the United Kingdom. Retrieved 6 February 2017. This content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0. © Crown copyright.
Jump up ^ "Renew your driving licence if you're 70 or over". Retrieved 29 May 2014.
Jump up ^ "Forklift Training". Wanadrive.co.uk. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ "Union Flags now feature on British driving licences". gov.uk. Retrieved 2016-03-12.
^ Jump up to: a b "Licensed to drive". Motor. 23 May 1970. p. 32.
Jump up ^ Mostrous, Alexi (20 December 2007). "81 facts about the Queen". The Times. Retrieved 10 May 2011.
Jump up ^ "1903 – 2003: 100 Years of Licensing and Registration in Britain". showplatesdirect.com. Retrieved 26 April 2015.
Jump up ^ "UK | Drivers face new photocard licence". BBC News. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ "Driving licence changes". Gov.uk. Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. 22 December 2014. Retrieved 7 January 2015.
Jump up ^ "The photocard driving licence explained". nidirect.gov.uk. 2016-05-17. Retrieved 2016-09-14.
Jump up ^ "DVLA INF45/1 "Your new Driving Licence" June 2008" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
Jump up ^ "ID checking guidelines for DBS check applications". 2015-10-23. Retrieved 2017-02-15.
Jump up ^ "Driving licence categories - GOV.UK". www.gov.uk. Retrieved 2017-07-15.
Jump up ^ http://www.freightpersonnel.co.uk/
Jump up ^ https://www.gov.uk/penalty-points-endorsements/endorsement-codes-and-penalty-points
Jump up ^ ""Endorsements, penalty points and disqualification", Direct.gov.uk". Gov.uk. 2013-07-19. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ "New Driving Laws and What They Mean For Drivers". absolutereg.co.uk. 2015-08-06.
Jump up ^ https://www.gov.uk/driving-licence-codes (OGL 3.0)
Jump up ^ "Road Traffic Act 1988". Legislation.gov.uk. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
Jump up ^ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/culture-obituaries/music-obituaries/8386589/Smiley-Culture.html
External links[edit]
DVLA England, Scotland and Wales driver information website
DVA Northern Ireland driver licensing website
Driving licence codes
[show]
v
t
e
Driving licence in Europe
Sovereign states
Albania
Andorra
Armenia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Kazakhstan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Malta
Moldova
Monaco
Montenegro
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
San Marino
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
Ukraine
United Kingdom
States with limited
recognition
Abkhazia
Artsakh
Northern Cyprus
South Ossetia
Transnistria
Dependencies and
other entities
Åland
Faroe Islands
Gibraltar
Guernsey
Isle of Man
Jersey
Svalbard
Other entities
European Union
[show]
v
t
e
Driving in the United Kingdom
Main topics
Approved Driving Instructor
British land speed record
Driving examiner (United Kingdom)
The Highway Code
Driving licence in the United Kingdom
List of UK driving licence endorsements
Road signs in the United Kingdom
Road speed limit enforcement in the United Kingdom
Road speed limits in the United Kingdom
United Kingdom traffic laws
Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions
Acts
Locomotives on Highways Act 1896
Motor Car Act 1903
Road Traffic Act 1934
Organisations
British School of Motoring
Disabled Motoring UK
Driver and Vehicle Agency
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency
Driving Standards Agency
IAM RoadSmart
Motor Insurers' Bureau
Safety Camera Partnership
Driving test
Hazard Perception Test
United Kingdom driving test
Schemes
National Driver Offender Retraining Scheme
Pass Plus
Young Driver Schemes
TV & Entertainment
Britain's Worst Driver
Clarkson's Car Years
Driven (TV series)
Driving School
Fifth Gear
For The Love Of Cars
Jeremy Clarkson's Motorworld
Sniff Petrol
Top Gear (1977 TV series)
Top Gear (2002 TV series)
Offences
Causing bodily harm by wanton or furious driving
Causing death by dangerous driving
Dangerous driving
DR10
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Driving_licence_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=841736054"
Categories:
Driving licences by country
Driving in the United Kingdom
Hidden categories:
Use British English from July 2015
Use dmy dates from September 2011
Articles containing Welsh-language text
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from June 2014
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Edit links
This page was last edited on 17 May 2018, at 18:27.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: th

attrs: colspan style

value: tr

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: href class

value: td

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: href title

values:
/wiki/Driver_%26_Vehicle_Agency
mw-redirect
Driver & Vehicle Agency

values: Edit section: Provisional licences and learner drivers

values:
/wiki/Forklift_truck
mw-redirect
Forklift truck

values:
/wiki/Scots_Gaelic
mw-redirect
Scots Gaelic

values:
/wiki/Local_authorities
mw-redirect
Local authorities

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.gov.uk/view-driving-licence

values:
/wiki/Acronym_and_initialism
mw-redirect
Acronym and initialism

values: Edit section: Driving licence categories

values: background: #ececec; color: #2C2C2C; vertical-align: middle; font-size: smaller; text-align: center;

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (June 2014)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Stop_and_search
mw-redirect
Stop and search

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.gov.uk/towing-with-car

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.wanadrive.co.uk/Forklift.htm

values:
nofollow
http://www.freightpersonnel.co.uk/
external free

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/drivers.aspx

values:
/wiki/Driving_licence_in_Europe
mw-redirect
Driving licence in Europe

values: Driving licence in Andorra (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Armenia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Belarus (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Bosnia and Herzegovina (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in the Czech Republic (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Estonia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Georgia (country) (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Hungary (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in the Republic of Ireland

values: Driving licence in Kazakhstan (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Latvia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Liechtenstein (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Lithuania (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Luxembourg (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in the Republic of Macedonia

values: Driving licence in Malta (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Moldova (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Monaco (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Montenegro (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Portugal (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in San Marino (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Serbia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Slovakia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Slovenia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Switzerland (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Abkhazia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in the Republic of Artsakh (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in South Ossetia (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Transnistria (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Åland (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in the Faroe Islands (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Gibraltar (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Guernsey (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in the Isle of Man (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Jersey (page does not exist)

values: Driving licence in Svalbard (page does not exist)

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Template talk:Driving in the United Kingdom (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/IAM_RoadSmart
mw-redirect
IAM RoadSmart

values: National Driver Offender Retraining Scheme

values:
/wiki/For_The_Love_Of_Cars
mw-redirect
For The Love Of Cars

values: Category:Use British English from July 2015

values: Category:Use dmy dates from September 2011

values: Category:Articles containing Welsh-language text

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from June 2014

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: رخصة القيادة البريطانية – Arabic

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Driving_licence_in_the_United_Kingdom rootpage-Driving_licence_in_the_United_Kingdom skin-vector action-view