Burton v R

Burton v R

The conviction was unsafe because the trial judge failed to rigorously apply the legal tests for permitting a second retrial, did not adequately address the requirements of extreme gravity and very powerful evidence, and the summing up was defective, omitting important evidence and lacking structure, thereby...

Source-derived case information.

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
Second Retrial, Abuse of Process, Interests of Justice, Conspiracy to Import Drugs, Summing Up, Unsafe Conviction
Criminal Law Second Retrial Abuse of Process Interests of Justice Conspiracy to Import Drugs Summing Up Unsafe Conviction

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
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 it was proper to permit a second retrial after two hung juries
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge correctly applied the legal tests for permitting a second retrial
  3. 3 Whether the summing up was defective and amounted to a misdirection

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe because the trial judge failed to rigorously apply the legal tests for permitting a second retrial, did not adequately address the requirements of extreme gravity and very powerful evidence, and the summing up was defective, omitting important evidence and lacking structure, thereby depriving the jury of proper assistance.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • No retrial ordered