R v Linton Bloomfield

R v Linton Bloomfield

The court found that there was no abuse of process as the prosecution took reasonable steps to obtain and disclose evidence, and the applicant suffered no prejudice. The refusal to adjourn the trial was justified. The proposed fresh evidence did not meet the requirements for admissibility. The grounds of appeal were wholly unarguable.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Linton Bloomfield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused
Legal Topics
Dangerous Driving, Abuse of Process, Admissibility of Evidence, Fresh Evidence, Trial Procedure
Criminal Law Road Traffic Dangerous Driving Abuse of Process Admissibility of Evidence Fresh Evidence Trial 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Linton Bloomfield

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's conviction for causing serious injury by dangerous driving was safe
  2. 2 Whether the trial should have been stayed as an abuse of process due to missing dashcam footage
  3. 3 Whether the refusal to adjourn the trial was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no abuse of process as the prosecution took reasonable steps to obtain and disclose evidence, and the applicant suffered no prejudice. The refusal to adjourn the trial was justified. The proposed fresh evidence did not meet the requirements for admissibility. The grounds of appeal were wholly unarguable.

Court Disposition

renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused

Orders

  • applications for leave to call additional evidence refused
  • renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused