Heaven, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 88 (23 January 2024)

Heaven, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 88 (23 January 2024)

The prosecution evidence, taken at its highest, was not capable of making a jury sure that the appellant knew or believed the complainant had assisted the police in the relevant investigation, an essential ingredient of the intimidation offence; the conviction was therefore unsafe and must be quashed.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 88
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Damien Daniel Heaven
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Intimidation, Assault by Battery, Criminal Damage, No Case to Answer Submission, Appeal Against Conviction, Resentencing
Criminal Law Intimidation Assault by Battery Criminal Damage No Case to Answer Submission Appeal Against Conviction Resentencing

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

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Damien Daniel Heaven

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for intimidation was safe given the absence of evidence that the appellant knew or believed the complainant had assisted the police investigation
  2. 2 Whether the Recorder was correct to reject the submission of no case to answer on the intimidation charge
  3. 3 Appropriateness of resentencing for assault by battery

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution evidence, taken at its highest, was not capable of making a jury sure that the appellant knew or believed the complainant had assisted the police in the relevant investigation, an essential ingredient of the intimidation offence; the conviction was therefore unsafe and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Conviction on Count 1 (intimidation) quashed
  • No retrial ordered on Count 1