Hulme, R. v

Hulme, R. v

The judge erred in allowing the witness statement to accompany the jury and failed to give sufficiently robust directions, but the strength of the evidence against the appellant was such that the conviction was not rendered unsafe by these procedural errors.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Mark Simon Hulme; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Grievous Bodily Harm, Jury Directions, Hostile Witness, Evidence Admissibility
Criminal Law Grievous Bodily Harm Jury Directions Hostile Witness Evidence Admissibility

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Simon Hulme

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in allowing a hostile witness statement to accompany the jury during deliberations
  2. 2 Whether the judge gave adequate directions regarding inconsistencies between oral and written evidence
  3. 3 Whether the conviction was unsafe due to procedural errors

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in allowing the witness statement to accompany the jury and failed to give sufficiently robust directions, but the strength of the evidence against the appellant was such that the conviction was not rendered unsafe by these procedural errors.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; conviction upheld