Danells, R. v [2006] EWCA Crim 628 (23 March 2006)

Danells, R. v [2006] EWCA Crim 628 (23 March 2006)

The circumstantial evidence against the appellant was sufficiently strong that a jury, properly directed, could convict; the trial judge was correct to reject the submission of no case to answer, as the alternative inference offered by the defence was logically possible but not compelling enough to require withdrawal from the jury.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Crim 628
Parties
Prosecution: R; Appellant: DANELLS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, Submission of No Case to Answer
Criminal Law Murder Circumstantial Evidence Submission of No Case to Answer

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

DANELLS

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting the submission of no case to answer at the conclusion of the prosecution case
  2. 2 Whether the circumstantial evidence was sufficient for a jury to convict

Ratio Decidendi

The circumstantial evidence against the appellant was sufficiently strong that a jury, properly directed, could convict; the trial judge was correct to reject the submission of no case to answer, as the alternative inference offered by the defence was logically possible but not compelling enough to require withdrawal from the jury.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • conviction upheld