Thompson, R v

Thompson, R v

There was no evidence upon which a properly directed jury could conclude, to the criminal standard, that a conspiracy existed between the appellant and any other person unknown to possess firearms with intent to endanger life. The judge erred in dismissing the submission of no case to answer after the indictment was amended to remove named co-defendants. The conviction on count one was unsafe and must be quashed.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Emmanuel Thompson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; conviction on count one quashed; conviction on count two upheld; sentence on count two varied.
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Possession of Firearms, Bad Character Evidence, False Impression, Amendment of Indictment, No Case to Answer
Criminal Law Conspiracy Possession of Firearms Bad Character Evidence False Impression Amendment of Indictment 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Emmanuel Thompson

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of previous convictions was admissible to correct a false impression under section 101(1)(f) Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution could amend the indictment to allege conspiracy with persons unknown after acquittal of named co-defendants
  3. 3 Whether there was a case to answer for conspiracy to possess firearms with intent to endanger life with persons unknown

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence upon which a properly directed jury could conclude, to the criminal standard, that a conspiracy existed between the appellant and any other person unknown to possess firearms with intent to endanger life. The judge erred in dismissing the submission of no case to answer after the indictment was amended to remove named co-defendants. The conviction on count one was unsafe and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; conviction on count one quashed; conviction on count two upheld; sentence on count two varied.

Orders

  • Conviction on count one quashed
  • Appellant to be resentenced on count two to 8 ½ years imprisonment from original sentencing date