Marchant, R. v

Marchant, R. v

Although the judge's interventions during the appellant's examination-in-chief were, at times, unnecessary and improper, they did not materially impair the appellant's ability to give his account or render the trial unfair. The summing up, while containing minor inaccuracies and omissions, was not fundamentally unbalanced. The conviction is safe.

Parties
Respondent: The Queen; Appellant: Mark Marchant
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Judicial Conduct, Fair Trial, Summing Up, Judicial Intervention
Criminal Law Rape Judicial Conduct Fair Trial Summing Up Judicial Intervention

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Respondent

Mark Marchant

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge's interventions during the appellant's examination-in-chief and summing up rendered the trial unfair and the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

Although the judge's interventions during the appellant's examination-in-chief were, at times, unnecessary and improper, they did not materially impair the appellant's ability to give his account or render the trial unfair. The summing up, while containing minor inaccuracies and omissions, was not fundamentally unbalanced. The conviction is safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction upheld