Fitzgerald, R. v [2003] EWCA Crim 576 (05 March 2003)
The appeal against conviction was dismissed because the appellant suffered no unfairness or prejudice from the late introduction of the section 5(2) charge, and the jury's verdict could be treated as a verdict on a separate count. The appeal against sentence was dismissed as the sentence was appropriate and in line with authority for passport offences.
- Citation
- [2003] EWCA Crim 576
- Parties
- Prosecution: The Queen; Appellant: John Cornelius Fitzgerald
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 05 March 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Forgery, False Instruments, Appeal Procedure, Sentencing
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Queen
Prosecution
John Cornelius Fitzgerald
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether section 5(2) of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 can be treated as an alternative verdict under section 6(3) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 to section 5(1)
- 2 Whether the appellant was prejudiced by the late introduction of the section 5(2) offence
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed was appropriate
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal against conviction was dismissed because the appellant suffered no unfairness or prejudice from the late introduction of the section 5(2) charge, and the jury's verdict could be treated as a verdict on a separate count. The appeal against sentence was dismissed as the sentence was appropriate and in line with authority for passport offences.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal against conviction dismissed
- Appeal against sentence dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment