Burdett & Anor, R. v

The appeal against conviction is dismissed because the evidence regarding the complainants was properly admitted, there was no real risk of bias from the police officer juror, and the summing-up was fair. However, the sentences were excessive given the lack of evidence that the appellants knew the source of the funds was from predatory fraud, their good character, and the delay in proceedings; sentences are reduced to two years each.

Parties: Prosecutor: Regina; Appellant: David Burdett; Appellant: Colin Smith
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 12 February 2009
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome: convictions upheld, sentences reduced
Legal Topics: Money Laundering, Jury Composition, Admissibility of Evidence, Summing Up, Sentence Reduction

Criminal Law Money Laundering Jury Composition Admissibility of Evidence Summing Up Sentence Reduction

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

David Burdett

Appellant

Colin Smith

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

1 Whether the admission of facts regarding the complainants' age and vulnerability was prejudicial and unfair to the appellants
2 Whether the presence of a police officer on the jury compromised the fairness of the trial
3 Whether the judge's summing-up was unfair or prejudicial to the appellants

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

convictions upheld, sentences reduced

Orders

Appeals against conviction dismissed
Sentences of three years quashed and substituted with sentences of two years for each appellant