Grigsby, R. v

Grigsby, R. v

This was not a fleeting glance; the complainant had a good opportunity to observe the accused under good lighting for a significant period. The discrepancies in description did not render the identification so weak as to require withdrawal from the jury. The judge was entitled to leave the case to the jury, who were properly directed and entitled to convict.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Daniel Grigsby
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Identification Evidence, Sexual Offences, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Identification Evidence Sexual Offences Appeal Procedure

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Daniel Grigsby

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether discrepancies in the complainant's description of the accused rendered the identification unsafe and required withdrawal of the case from the jury
  2. 2 Whether the principles in Turnbull on identification evidence were properly applied

Ratio Decidendi

This was not a fleeting glance; the complainant had a good opportunity to observe the accused under good lighting for a significant period. The discrepancies in description did not render the identification so weak as to require withdrawal from the jury. The judge was entitled to leave the case to the jury, who were properly directed and entitled to convict.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; conviction upheld