Chuhan, R. v [2017] EWCA Crim 776 (19 June 2017)
The fresh evidence does not render the conviction unsafe because it goes only to credibility, is affected by personal hostility, was available before trial without adequate explanation for its omission, and is inconsistent with the appellant's own defence; therefore, the conviction stands.
- Citation
- [2017] EWCA Crim 776
- Parties
- Respondent: R (Crown); Appellant: Mohammed Najeeb Chuhan
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 19 June 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction Out of Time Based on Fresh Evidence
- Outcome
- Appeal refused; conviction upheld
- Legal Topics
- Rape, Assault by Penetration, Fresh Evidence on Appeal, Credibility of Witnesses, Unsafe Conviction, Sexual Offences Act 2003, Criminal Appeal Act 1968 S.23
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
R (Crown)
Respondent
Mohammed Najeeb Chuhan
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction Out of Time Based on Fresh Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether fresh evidence renders the conviction unsafe
- 2 Whether the fresh evidence should be admitted under s.23 Criminal Appeal Act 1968
- 3 Whether there is a reasonable explanation for failure to adduce the evidence at trial
Ratio Decidendi
The fresh evidence does not render the conviction unsafe because it goes only to credibility, is affected by personal hostility, was available before trial without adequate explanation for its omission, and is inconsistent with the appellant's own defence; therefore, the conviction stands.
Court Disposition
Appeal refused; conviction upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment