Broadhead, R. v

Broadhead, R. v

There was so little evidence implicating the appellant in the attack that no reasonable jury could properly have convicted on the evidence at the end of the Crown's case. The trial judge should have upheld the submission of no case to answer, and the conviction is unsafe.

Parties
Appellant: David Broadhead; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Murder, No Case to Answer Submission, Circumstantial Evidence, Adverse Inference From Silence
Criminal Law Murder No Case to Answer Submission Circumstantial Evidence Adverse Inference From Silence

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Broadhead

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting a submission of no case to answer at the close of the prosecution's case
  2. 2 Whether the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for murder

Ratio Decidendi

There was so little evidence implicating the appellant in the attack that no reasonable jury could properly have convicted on the evidence at the end of the Crown's case. The trial judge should have upheld the submission of no case to answer, and the conviction is unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • The conviction of the appellant for murder is quashed.