Regina v Durante: CACD 1972

Logical inconsistency is generally an essential prerequisite for success of an appeal against conviction on the ground of inconsistency of verdicts.
Edmund Davies LJ
(1972) 56 Cr App R 708
England and Wales
Cited by:

  • Cited – Regina v Warner CACD 17-Feb-1997
    The defendant appealed convictions for indecent assault, saying that convictions on some counts and acquittals on others were so inconsistent as to call the convictions into question, showing acceptance of the complainant’s evidence on some counts . .
    [1997] EWCA Crim 480
  • Cited – Regina v Van Der Molen CACD 20-Feb-1997
    The appellant had been acquitted of rape, but convicted of indecent assault.
    Held: ‘It did not follow that because the jury must have disbelieved a witness or rejected his or her evidence with the result that it acquitted on one count, it was . .
    [1997] EWCA Crim 523, [1997] CLR 604, 96/04148/Z4
  • Cited – Regina v Bell CACD 15-May-1997
    The Court upheld a conviction in respect of an Appellant who had been convicted of three offences on a six-count indictment. He was acquitted of the other three. In respect of each of the six counts the Prosecution relied upon the uncorroborated . .
    [1997] EWCA Crim 1200, 9700085Z4
  • Cited – Regina v McCluskey CACD 4-Jun-1993
    The consent of the Court of Appeal was needed to sanction any jury enquiry. . .
    Times 04-Jun-93, (1994) 98 Cr App R 216
  • Cited – Regina v Ball CACD 15-May-1997
    The court considered the correct approach on a suggestion of inconsistent jury verdicts: ‘As it seems to us there is no logical inconsistency in the verdicts returned by the jury and unless there is a logical inconsistency the question of whether or . .
    Unreported
  • Cited – Regina v Clarke and Fletcher CACD 30-Jul-1997
    Hutchison LJ said: ‘The way in which this Court should approach an appeal against conviction, based on allegedly inconsistent verdicts is well settled. To succeed the appellant must show first the verdicts are logically inconsistent, and secondly, . .
    (unreported, 30 July 1997)
  • Cited – Muhib, Regina v CACD 13-Jan-1998
    The defendant appealed against his conviction for manslaughter saying that the jury had returned inconsistent verdicts,
    Held: ‘there is no possible logical inconsistency in the jury returning a verdict of manslaughter in relation to one victim . .
    [1998] EWCA Crim 34

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 December 2020; Ref: scu.185678