D, R. v

D, R. v

The court held that the confessions and guilty plea to perjury by D constituted new and compelling evidence within the meaning of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The interests of justice required a retrial, as there was no unfairness arising from delay, publicity, or D's reliance on the double jeopardy rule. The application of Part 10 was justified and a retrial was ordered.

Parties
Applicant: R; Respondent: William Vincent D
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application Under Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to Quash Acquittal and Order Retrial
Outcome
Application granted; acquittal quashed; retrial ordered.
Legal Topics
Double Jeopardy, Retrial After Acquittal, New and Compelling Evidence, Interests of Justice, Perjury, Confession Evidence
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Double Jeopardy Retrial After Acquittal New and Compelling Evidence Interests of Justice Perjury Confession Evidence

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Applicant

William Vincent D

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application Under Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to Quash Acquittal and Order Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether new and compelling evidence exists to justify quashing the acquittal and ordering a retrial under Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether it is in the interests of justice to order a retrial given the delay, publicity, and reliance on the double jeopardy rule

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the confessions and guilty plea to perjury by D constituted new and compelling evidence within the meaning of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The interests of justice required a retrial, as there was no unfairness arising from delay, publicity, or D's reliance on the double jeopardy rule. The application of Part 10 was justified and a retrial was ordered.

Court Disposition

Application granted; acquittal quashed; retrial ordered.

Orders

  • D's acquittal quashed.
  • D to be retried for the murder of Julie H.