Khan, R. v

Khan, R. v

The trial judge was correct to refuse to admit the hearsay statement of CS as she was available to be called and the statement contained manifest inaccuracies. The judge was also correct to allow the evidence of AW as it was relevant to rebut the appellant's claims. The sentence of imprisonment for public protection was justified given the risk posed by the appellant, and the notional determinate sentence was not manifestly excessive.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Appellant: Mohammed Khan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Hearsay Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Imprisonment for Public Protection, Sentencing
Criminal Law Rape Hearsay Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Imprisonment for Public Protection Sentencing

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Mohammed Khan

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to admit the hearsay statement of CS under section 114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in allowing the evidence of AW for the prosecution
  3. 3 Whether the sentence of imprisonment for public protection was justified and whether the notional determinate sentence was excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was correct to refuse to admit the hearsay statement of CS as she was available to be called and the statement contained manifest inaccuracies. The judge was also correct to allow the evidence of AW as it was relevant to rebut the appellant's claims. The sentence of imprisonment for public protection was justified given the risk posed by the appellant, and the notional determinate sentence was not manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction upheld
  • Sentence of imprisonment for public protection confirmed