Reynolds v R

Reynolds v R

The judge's summing-up was balanced and fair, and any deficiencies did not render the conviction unsafe. The exclusion of the co-conspirator's interview was proper as it was irrelevant and potentially distracting. The judge's directions to the jury did not undermine the fairness of the trial.

Parties
Appellant: Nicholas Reynolds; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Retrial
Outcome
appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Corrupt, Summing Up, Admissibility of Evidence, Judicial Directions, Fair Trial
Criminal Law Conspiracy to Corrupt Summing Up Admissibility of Evidence Judicial Directions 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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicholas Reynolds

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's summing-up was unbalanced or unfair
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in refusing to admit parts of a co-conspirator's interview as evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge's directions to the jury on the defendant's evidence were improper

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's summing-up was balanced and fair, and any deficiencies did not render the conviction unsafe. The exclusion of the co-conspirator's interview was proper as it was irrelevant and potentially distracting. The judge's directions to the jury did not undermine the fairness of the trial.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; conviction upheld