H, R. v (Rev 1)

H, R. v (Rev 1)

The trial judge's decision to limit cross-examination to relevant matters and exclude wider exploration of the 2001 investigation and allegations was correct in law and did not render the conviction unsafe.

Parties
Appellant: H; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Cross Examination, Admissibility of Evidence, Trial Procedure
Criminal Law Rape Cross Examination Admissibility of Evidence Trial 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in limiting the cross-examination of the complainant regarding events in 2001 and prior inconsistent statements

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's decision to limit cross-examination to relevant matters and exclude wider exploration of the 2001 investigation and allegations was correct in law and did not render the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction upheld
  • No further orders made