Tams, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 582 (15 May 2024)

Tams, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 582 (15 May 2024)

The alleged conversation between the prison officer and a juror occurred after the verdict, did not suggest any irregularity or prejudice, and was incapable of supporting an arguable ground of appeal. There was no basis for admitting the fresh evidence or referring the matter to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 582
Parties
Applicant: Nicola Tams; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Conviction; Application for Referral to Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Robbery, Wounding With Intent, Jury Irregularity, Fresh Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Robbery Wounding With Intent Jury Irregularity Fresh Evidence Appeal Procedure

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

Nicola Tams

Applicant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Conviction; Application for Referral to Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether alleged post-verdict contact between a juror and a prison officer constituted a jury irregularity affecting the safety of the conviction
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence warranted referral to the Criminal Cases Review Commission or admission on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The alleged conversation between the prison officer and a juror occurred after the verdict, did not suggest any irregularity or prejudice, and was incapable of supporting an arguable ground of appeal. There was no basis for admitting the fresh evidence or referring the matter to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Refusal to admit fresh evidence
  • Refusal to direct the Criminal Cases Review Commission to investigate