Mohammed v R [2018] EWCA Crim 675 (28 March 2018)

Mohammed v R [2018] EWCA Crim 675 (28 March 2018)

The fresh evidence from Mr Clarke does not raise a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the applicant due to significant evidential and procedural deficiencies; therefore, permission to appeal against conviction is refused. The sentence imposed was technically unlawful as the statutory provision for an extended licence period did not apply; the sentence is quashed and substituted with a lawful custodial term.

Citation
[2018] EWCA Crim 675
Parties
Appellant: Khaldoun Mohammed; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction refused; appeal against sentence allowed in part
Legal Topics
Rape, Fresh Evidence, Appeal Against Conviction, Sentencing Error

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khaldoun Mohammed

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence calls into question the safety of the conviction for rape
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful under the relevant statutory provisions

Ratio Decidendi

The fresh evidence from Mr Clarke does not raise a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the applicant due to significant evidential and procedural deficiencies; therefore, permission to appeal against conviction is refused. The sentence imposed was technically unlawful as the statutory provision for an extended licence period did not apply; the sentence is quashed and substituted with a lawful custodial term.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction refused; appeal against sentence allowed in part

Orders

  • Permission to appeal against conviction refused
  • Fresh evidence not admitted