Hewgill & Ors, R v

Hewgill & Ors, R v

The conviction on count 4 against Hewgill was quashed because improper contact between Murray and jurors before the verdict introduced extraneous material, and the jury's failure to report it rendered the verdict unsafe. There was insufficient evidence that Hewgill instigated the contact. Other contacts between jurors and defendants did not amount to a violation of the jury oath or affect the safety of the other convictions. The trial judge's evidential and procedural rulings were upheld, and the sentences for Hancock and Murray were not manifestly excessive. The sentences on Hewgill's remaining counts were increased following the quashing of count 4.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Michael Hewgill; Appellant: David Hancock; Appellant: Gloria Anne Murray
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; conviction on count 4 quashed for Hewgill; other convictions upheld; sentences adjusted.
Legal Topics
Jury Misconduct, Appeal Against Conviction, Appeal Against Sentence, Drug Offences, Jury Contact With Parties, Disclosure, Bad Character Evidence
Criminal Law Jury Misconduct Appeal Against Conviction Appeal Against Sentence Drug Offences Jury Contact With Parties Disclosure Bad Character Evidence

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Michael Hewgill

Appellant

David Hancock

Appellant

Gloria Anne Murray

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether jury contact with a defendant (Murray) before a verdict rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether prior informal contact between jurors and defendants tainted the verdicts
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in various evidential and procedural rulings

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction on count 4 against Hewgill was quashed because improper contact between Murray and jurors before the verdict introduced extraneous material, and the jury's failure to report it rendered the verdict unsafe. There was insufficient evidence that Hewgill instigated the contact. Other contacts between jurors and defendants did not amount to a violation of the jury oath or affect the safety of the other convictions. The trial judge's evidential and procedural rulings were upheld, and the sentences for Hancock and Murray were not manifestly excessive. The sentences on Hewgill's remaining counts were increased following the quashing of count 4.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; conviction on count 4 quashed for Hewgill; other convictions upheld; sentences adjusted.

Orders

  • Conviction on count 4 (conspiracy to supply heroin) against Hewgill quashed.
  • Sentences on other counts for Hewgill increased to a total of 17 years imprisonment.