Hayward, R v [2000] EWCA Crim 32 (19th April, 2000)

Hayward, R v [2000] EWCA Crim 32 (19th April, 2000)

The absence of a specific direction that the Crown must disprove the alibi and the lack of a failed alibi direction did not render the convictions unsafe because the summing-up as a whole made the burden of proof clear, the prosecution did not rely on lies as supporting evidence, and the identification evidence was corroborated by compelling supporting evidence.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Crim 32
Parties
Appellant: Michael Anthony Hickey; Appellant: Jonathan Roy Hayward; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal against conviction dismissed
Legal Topics
Alibi Directions, Burden of Proof, Identification Evidence, Failed Alibi Direction, Conspiracy to Rob, Firearms Offences, Robbery, Grievous Bodily Harm
Criminal Law Alibi Directions Burden of Proof Identification Evidence Failed Alibi Direction Conspiracy to Rob Firearms Offences Robbery +1 more

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

Parties

Michael Anthony Hickey

Appellant

Jonathan Roy Hayward

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury regarding the burden of proof on alibi evidence
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a 'failed alibi' direction rendered the convictions unsafe
  3. 3 Whether the identification evidence was too weak to support conviction

Ratio Decidendi

The absence of a specific direction that the Crown must disprove the alibi and the lack of a failed alibi direction did not render the convictions unsafe because the summing-up as a whole made the burden of proof clear, the prosecution did not rely on lies as supporting evidence, and the identification evidence was corroborated by compelling supporting evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal against conviction dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals against conviction dismissed
  • Appeals against sentence adjourned to a later date