Greenwood, R. v

The trial judge's failure to direct the jury on significant discrepancies between the main witnesses' evidence constituted a material omission, rendering the convictions unsafe.

Parties: Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Michael Greenwood
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 03 March 2009
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome: appeal allowed, conviction quashed, no retrial ordered
Legal Topics: Summing Up, Jury Directions, Inconsistent Evidence, Unsafe Conviction, Retrial Discretion

Criminal Law Summing Up Jury Directions Inconsistent Evidence Unsafe Conviction Retrial Discretion

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Michael Greenwood

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

1 Whether the trial judge failed to direct the jury on significant inconsistencies in the evidence
2 Whether such failure rendered the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's failure to direct the jury on significant discrepancies between the main witnesses' evidence constituted a material omission, rendering the convictions unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed, conviction quashed, no retrial ordered

Orders

conviction quashed
no retrial directed