Martins, R. v (Rev 1)

Martins, R. v (Rev 1)

It was properly open to the jury to find that the appellant's act of pulling the phone and keys from Mr Dewan's grasp amounted to the use of force on the person, and thus the recorder was correct to reject the submission of no case to answer.

Parties
Appellant: Joseph Martins; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Robbery, Theft, Use of Force, No Case to Answer, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Robbery Theft Use of Force No Case to Answer Jury Directions

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Martins

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the recorder was wrong to refuse the submission of no case to answer on the charge of robbery
  2. 2 Whether the evidence was sufficient for a jury to find that force was used on the victim for the purposes of robbery

Ratio Decidendi

It was properly open to the jury to find that the appellant's act of pulling the phone and keys from Mr Dewan's grasp amounted to the use of force on the person, and thus the recorder was correct to reject the submission of no case to answer.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed