Boxall, R. v

Boxall, R. v

The evidence relating to Kevin Doyle's conviction was properly admitted under section 100(1)(b) as it had substantial probative value to the issue of whether the applicant was a party to the conspiracy. The judge's directions mitigated any prejudice, and the conviction is safe. The applicant played a leading role in the conspiracy, justifying the sentence imposed.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Arthur Boxall
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence refused
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Conspiracy to Supply Drugs, Sentencing Guidelines, Admissibility of Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Arthur Boxall

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of a third party's conviction under section 100(1)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the applicant played a leading role in the conspiracy for sentencing purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence relating to Kevin Doyle's conviction was properly admitted under section 100(1)(b) as it had substantial probative value to the issue of whether the applicant was a party to the conspiracy. The judge's directions mitigated any prejudice, and the conviction is safe. The applicant played a leading role in the conspiracy, justifying the sentence imposed.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence refused