Dreszer, R. v

Dreszer, R. v

The conviction for murder was unsafe because the jury may have convicted on the impermissible basis of foresight rather than intention, following misdirection on secondary liability. The directions left open the possibility of conviction without the necessary intent, and the court could not be confident the jury convicted on the correct legal basis.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Kamil Dreszer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Retrial
Outcome
Conviction quashed; retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Murder, Secondary Liability, Joint Enterprise, Manslaughter, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Murder Secondary Liability Joint Enterprise Manslaughter 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Kamil Dreszer

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge's directions on secondary liability were erroneous in light of R v Jogee
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for murder was unsafe due to misdirection on foresight as a basis for secondary liability
  3. 3 Whether a retrial should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction for murder was unsafe because the jury may have convicted on the impermissible basis of foresight rather than intention, following misdirection on secondary liability. The directions left open the possibility of conviction without the necessary intent, and the court could not be confident the jury convicted on the correct legal basis.

Court Disposition

Conviction quashed; retrial ordered

Orders

  • Conviction for murder quashed
  • Retrial for murder ordered