Wright, R v

Wright, R v

Where the prosecution case does not distinguish between separate identifiable occasions for repeated acts, the jury need only be sure that an offence occurred on an occasion within the relevant period, and unanimity as to a specific occasion is not required.

Parties
Appellant: Ashley Nemiah Wright; Respondent: Regina (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Specimen Counts, Jury Directions, Rape, Robbery, Unanimity of Verdict
Criminal Law Specimen Counts Jury Directions Rape Robbery Unanimity of Verdict

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashley Nemiah Wright

Appellant

Regina (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's direction to the jury on specimen counts was a material misdirection
  2. 2 Whether the jury needed to be unanimous as to the specific occasion of the offence in specimen counts

Ratio Decidendi

Where the prosecution case does not distinguish between separate identifiable occasions for repeated acts, the jury need only be sure that an offence occurred on an occasion within the relevant period, and unanimity as to a specific occasion is not required.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed