Norris, R v

Norris, R v

The trial judge's directions on cross-admissibility and bad character evidence were adequate. The jury was properly instructed to consider each case separately and only use evidence from one case in another if satisfied of sufficient similarity and absence of coincidence. There was no misdirection and the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: Colin Norris
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Attempted Murder, Bad Character Evidence, Cross Admissibility, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Murder Attempted Murder Bad Character Evidence Cross Admissibility Jury Directions

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

Parties

R

Respondent

Colin Norris

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge failed to adequately direct the jury on cross-admissibility of evidence regarding cause of death and identity
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to address how cross-admissibility could support different counts
  3. 3 Whether the directions on bad character evidence were sufficient

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's directions on cross-admissibility and bad character evidence were adequate. The jury was properly instructed to consider each case separately and only use evidence from one case in another if satisfied of sufficient similarity and absence of coincidence. There was no misdirection and the convictions were safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed