Semaj, R v

Semaj, R v

The court found that the evidence of Luan Gjecaj was incapable of belief, collusive, and fabricated in concert with the appellant. As such, it was not in the interests of justice to admit it as fresh evidence, and the conviction was safe.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Moraj Semaj
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fresh Evidence, Joint Enterprise, Witness Credibility, Anonymity Orders, Safety of Conviction
Criminal Law Fresh Evidence Joint Enterprise Witness Credibility Anonymity Orders Safety of Conviction

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

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Moraj Semaj

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence from Luan Gjecaj should be admitted under s.23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968
  2. 2 Whether the conviction is unsafe in light of the alleged new evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the evidence of Luan Gjecaj was incapable of belief, collusive, and fabricated in concert with the appellant. As such, it was not in the interests of justice to admit it as fresh evidence, and the conviction was safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Fresh evidence of Luan Gjecaj not admitted
  • Conviction stands