Baker, R v

Baker, R v

The summing-up was fair and sufficient, adequately directing the jury on joint enterprise, withdrawal, and intent. The possibility of individual responsibility was properly put to the jury. However, the absence of a specific direction on the robbery count regarding unanimity as to the item robbed was fatal to the robbery conviction.

Parties
Respondent: The Queen; Appellant: Mark Anthony Baker
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against murder conviction dismissed; appeal against robbery conviction allowed.
Legal Topics
Murder, Robbery, Joint Enterprise, Withdrawal From Joint Enterprise, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Murder Robbery Joint Enterprise Withdrawal From Joint Enterprise 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Respondent

Mark Anthony Baker

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's directions on joint enterprise and withdrawal were sufficient
  2. 2 Whether the judge's directions on intent were proper
  3. 3 Whether the judge's example regarding individual responsibility was misleading

Ratio Decidendi

The summing-up was fair and sufficient, adequately directing the jury on joint enterprise, withdrawal, and intent. The possibility of individual responsibility was properly put to the jury. However, the absence of a specific direction on the robbery count regarding unanimity as to the item robbed was fatal to the robbery conviction.

Court Disposition

Appeal against murder conviction dismissed; appeal against robbery conviction allowed.

Orders

  • Murder conviction upheld; sentence affirmed.
  • Robbery conviction quashed.