Burcombe v R.

Burcombe v R.

There was no evidence of actual or apparent bias, improper influence, or prejudicial information imparted to jurors; the irregular summoning and social contact did not render the conviction unsafe under the established legal test.

Parties
Appellant: Christopher John Burcombe; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Jury Irregularity, Bias, Misconduct in Public Office, Appeal Against Conviction, Safety of Conviction
Criminal Law Procedure Jury Irregularity Bias Misconduct in Public Office Appeal Against Conviction Safety of Conviction

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher John Burcombe

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether improper association between court official and jurors rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether the presence of jurors not properly summoned invalidates the verdict
  3. 3 Whether apparent bias or risk of prejudice existed due to jury irregularity

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence of actual or apparent bias, improper influence, or prejudicial information imparted to jurors; the irregular summoning and social contact did not render the conviction unsafe under the established legal test.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • conviction upheld