Ibrahim, R.

Ibrahim, R.

The trial judge did not err in excluding the expert evidence on ADHD because it was served late, the expert had not met the appellant, the report was not relevant to the main issue, and its admission would not have assisted the jury on the central question of who was the aggressor. The appeal is dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Mohammed Ibrahim; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Self Defence, Criminal Procedure
Criminal Law Admissibility of Expert Evidence Self Defence Criminal Procedure

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

Parties

Mohammed Ibrahim

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in excluding expert evidence on ADHD and its effects on the appellant's conduct
  2. 2 Whether exclusion of the expert evidence rendered the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge did not err in excluding the expert evidence on ADHD because it was served late, the expert had not met the appellant, the report was not relevant to the main issue, and its admission would not have assisted the jury on the central question of who was the aggressor. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed