R v Jordan Hernandez

R v Jordan Hernandez

The judge was entitled to accept Juror 11's unequivocal assurances that he would abide by the affirmation and try the case according to the evidence. Applying the Porter v McGill test, a fair minded and informed observer would not conclude that there was a real possibility of bias. The conviction is therefore safe.

Parties
Appellant: Jordan Hernandez; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Jury Bias, Jury Selection, Appeals Against Conviction
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Jury Bias Jury Selection Appeals Against Conviction

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jordan Hernandez

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction is unsafe due to a real possibility of bias on the part of a juror

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to accept Juror 11's unequivocal assurances that he would abide by the affirmation and try the case according to the evidence. Applying the Porter v McGill test, a fair minded and informed observer would not conclude that there was a real possibility of bias. The conviction is therefore safe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; conviction upheld