Miah, R v

Miah, R v

The conviction was unsafe due to the serious inadequacy of the summing-up, specifically the failure to direct the jury on the criminal standard of proof and the unbalanced treatment of the defence case, which together deprived the appellant of a fair trial.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Muked Miah
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal allowed, conviction quashed, no retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Summing Up, Standard of Proof, Conspiracy to Steal, Unsafe Conviction, Fair Trial
Criminal Law Summing Up Standard of Proof Conspiracy to Steal Unsafe Conviction Fair Trial

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Muked Miah

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the summing-up by the trial judge was legally adequate and fair
  2. 2 Whether the failure to direct the jury on the criminal standard of proof rendered the conviction unsafe
  3. 3 Whether the summing-up was unbalanced and disparaged the defence case

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe due to the serious inadequacy of the summing-up, specifically the failure to direct the jury on the criminal standard of proof and the unbalanced treatment of the defence case, which together deprived the appellant of a fair trial.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed, conviction quashed, no retrial ordered

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • No retrial directed