Regina v Fitzgerald: CACD 2006

The admission of evidence on appeal of a previous conviction may amount to a new basis for conviction, i.e. the propensity of the Appellant to commit offences of this type: ‘While this court can receive fresh evidence from the Crown, not only in rebuttal of the appellant’s fresh evidence but also to demonstrate the safety of the conviction generally (see Hanratty [2002] EWCA Crim 1141; [2002] 3 All ER 534), it is not open to the Crown to seek to put in fresh evidence so as to enable it to advance an entirely new basis for a conviction which was never put before the jury. That would require this court to act as if it were the jury and would run counter to the House of Lords’ decision in Pendleton [2001] UKHL 66; [2002] 1 WLR 72, where it was said by Lord Bingham of Cornhill that the Court of Appeal ‘is not and should never become the primary decision-maker. ‘


[2006] EWCA Crim 1655


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedS and Others v Regina CACD 28-Jun-2012
Four defendants appealed against convictions for child sex abuse. The convictions had taken place at a time when current guidance to examining physicians did not apply. In each case the defendants consented to new evidence from the prosecution.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.568159