N, R. v

N, R. v

The judge's oral directions, clarified in response to the jury's note, sufficiently explained the law on joint enterprise; the absence of written directions did not render the conviction unsafe given the facts and the jury's understanding.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: N
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Joint Enterprise, Jury Directions, Wounding With Intent, Written Directions, Unsafe Conviction
Criminal Law Joint Enterprise Jury Directions Wounding With Intent Written Directions Unsafe 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

N

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge misdirected the jury on joint enterprise
  2. 2 Whether the absence of written directions rendered the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's oral directions, clarified in response to the jury's note, sufficiently explained the law on joint enterprise; the absence of written directions did not render the conviction unsafe given the facts and the jury's understanding.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed