Edwards, R v [2001] EWCA Crim 2185 (19th October, 2001)

Edwards, R v [2001] EWCA Crim 2185 (19th October, 2001)

The trial judge was correct to exclude the proposed expert evidence as it was based on hearsay, lacked forensic or statistical foundation, and was therefore unreliable; the conviction was safe.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Crim 2185
Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Christopher Augustus Edwards
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Controlled Drugs, Hearsay Evidence, Expert Evidence, Sentencing
Criminal Law Controlled Drugs Hearsay Evidence Expert Evidence Sentencing

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Christopher Augustus Edwards

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in excluding expert evidence on patterns of drug use and consumption as hearsay
  2. 2 Whether the conviction was unsafe due to exclusion of such evidence
  3. 3 Appropriateness of sentence imposed for possession with intent to supply

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was correct to exclude the proposed expert evidence as it was based on hearsay, lacked forensic or statistical foundation, and was therefore unreliable; the conviction was safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.

Orders

  • Conviction upheld.
  • Sentence of three years quashed and replaced with a sentence of two years' imprisonment.