Miah & Anor, R. v

Miah & Anor, R. v

The evidence did not permit the inference that the appellants participated in or intentionally supported the attack with the requisite intent; therefore, their convictions were unsafe.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Alamin Miah; Appellant: Maruf Uddin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment After Appeal Hearing
Outcome
convictions quashed
Legal Topics
Joint Enterprise, Grievous Bodily Harm, Violent Disorder, Unsafe Conviction, No Case to Answer
Criminal Law Joint Enterprise Grievous Bodily Harm Violent Disorder Unsafe Conviction No Case to Answer

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Alamin Miah

Appellant

Maruf Uddin

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment After Appeal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence of joint enterprise to convict the appellants
  2. 2 Whether the judge should have acceded to the submission of no case to answer
  3. 3 Whether the convictions were safe given the jury's verdicts

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not permit the inference that the appellants participated in or intentionally supported the attack with the requisite intent; therefore, their convictions were unsafe.

Court Disposition

convictions quashed

Orders

  • leave to appeal granted
  • convictions of Maruf Uddin and Alamin Miah quashed