REGINA v BASHAR AL-SAFEE

REGINA v BASHAR AL-SAFEE

The trial judge was correct to exclude the evidence relating to prior shipments and associations as it lacked substantial probative value and was speculative. The exclusion did not render the conviction unsafe. The assessment of the applicant as having a leading role was supported by the evidence and was not...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: Bashar Al-Safee
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
renewed applications for permission to appeal against conviction and sentence refused
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Import Controlled Drugs, Conspiracy to Supply Controlled Drugs, Admissibility of Bad Character Evidence, Sentencing Principles
Criminal Law Conspiracy to Import Controlled Drugs Conspiracy to Supply Controlled Drugs Admissibility of Bad Character Evidence Sentencing Principles

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Bashar Al-Safee

Applicant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in excluding evidence relating to shipments and associations of non-defendants as relevant to the applicant's defence
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge was wrong to assess the applicant as having a leading role for sentencing purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was correct to exclude the evidence relating to prior shipments and associations as it lacked substantial probative value and was speculative. The exclusion did not render the conviction unsafe. The assessment of the applicant as having a leading role was supported by the evidence and was not irrational or unfounded. There were no arguable grounds for appeal against conviction or sentence.

Court Disposition

renewed applications for permission to appeal against conviction and sentence refused