Cummiskey, R v

Cummiskey, R v

The conviction was quashed because the fresh evidence regarding police misconduct could have affected the jury's assessment of the interview evidence, and it was impossible to determine whether the remaining evidence alone would have led to a conviction. Following the principle in Pendleton, the conviction was deemed unsafe.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: John Joseph Cummiskey
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal After Reference by Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Robbery, Possession of Firearms, Unsafe Conviction, Police Misconduct, Fresh Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Robbery Possession of Firearms Unsafe Conviction Police Misconduct Fresh Evidence Appeal 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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

John Joseph Cummiskey

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal After Reference by Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction of the appellant is unsafe in light of fresh evidence regarding police misconduct and the integrity of interview evidence
  2. 2 Whether the scientific evidence alone could sustain the conviction

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was quashed because the fresh evidence regarding police misconduct could have affected the jury's assessment of the interview evidence, and it was impossible to determine whether the remaining evidence alone would have led to a conviction. Following the principle in Pendleton, the conviction was deemed unsafe.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • Defendant's costs order made