Burton v R [2015] EWCA Crim 1307 (23 July 2015)

Burton v R [2015] EWCA Crim 1307 (23 July 2015)

The judge at trial failed to rigorously apply the required legal tests for permitting a second retrial, specifically failing to establish that the case was of extreme gravity and supported by very powerful evidence. The Crown did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying a third trial. Additionally, the summing up was defective, lacking adequate structure and failing to properly present the defence case and relevant evidence. These defects rendered the conviction unsafe.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Crim 1307
Parties
Appellant: Norman Burton; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Second Retrial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Retrials, Conspiracy to Import Drugs, Judicial Directions, Summing Up
Criminal Law Abuse of Process Retrials Conspiracy to Import Drugs Judicial Directions Summing Up

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norman Burton

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Second Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a second retrial after two hung juries was justified
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge properly applied the legal test for permitting a second retrial
  3. 3 Whether the summing up by the trial judge was adequate and fair

Ratio Decidendi

The judge at trial failed to rigorously apply the required legal tests for permitting a second retrial, specifically failing to establish that the case was of extreme gravity and supported by very powerful evidence. The Crown did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying a third trial. Additionally, the summing up was defective, lacking adequate structure and failing to properly present the defence case and relevant evidence. These defects rendered the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • No retrial ordered