The defendant sought to appeal his conviction in 1970 for robbery. He had refused to attend an identity parade but was then confronted with the main witness. Witnesses had also been shown photographs from which they were said to have selected the appellant. There had been several earlier appeals. The appellant now said that the earier court had misunderstood the unfair use made of the photographs.
Held: The application required determination about matters decided well over twenty years before and then about several years before that. The understanding of the evidence proposed was insufficiently clearly established to undermine the conviction. There were defects when judged as at today’s standard but not sufficiently to make the conviction unsafe.
Judges:
Latham LJ, Forbes, Steel JJ
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Crim 1862
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Pinfold CACD 1988
Once a person convicted of an offence on indictment appeals against that conviction and that appeal has been determined on its merits, the court has no jurisdiction to re-open it on fresh evidence coming to light.
Lord Lane CJ considered the . .
Cited – Regina v Pendleton HL 13-Dec-2001
The defendant had appealed his conviction for murder to the Court of Appeal. The 1968 Act required the court to consider whether the conviction was unsafe. New evidence was before the Court of Appeal, but they had rejected the appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Poole 1938
Open space land had been conveyed to Poole Corporation ‘in fee simple to the intent that the same may for ever hereafter be preserved and used as an open space or as a pleasure or recreation ground for the public use.’
Held: There was no . .
Cited – Poole and Mills v Regina CACD 17-Jun-2003
The case was a reference from the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The defendants had been convicted in 1990 of murder. The House of Lords had dismissed an earlier appeal. Police officers had allowed statements to be put forward which were false in . .
Cited – Thomas, Regina v CACD 26-Apr-2002
The hearing was a third appeal upon a reference by the Commission on the defendant’s conviction for murder.
Held: Auld LJ said that the court’s jurisdiction and a duty on a reference, as in an ordinary appeal, is to consider the safety of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.272293