R v AFJ

R v AFJ

The trial judge erred in ruling there was no case to answer as the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to infer intent to commit a sexual offence, and erred in refusing to admit bad character evidence which was highly relevant and not unfairly prejudicial given the similarity to the current offence.

Parties
Appellant: Rex; Respondent: AFJ
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Prosecution Appeal Against Trial Judge's Rulings
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
No Case to Answer, Bad Character Evidence, Sexual Offences, Attempted Robbery, Appeal Against Ruling
Criminal Law No Case to Answer Bad Character Evidence Sexual Offences Attempted Robbery Appeal Against Ruling

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Appellant

AFJ

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Prosecution Appeal Against Trial Judge's Rulings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in ruling there was no case to answer on the charge of assault with intent to commit a sexual offence
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to admit evidence of the respondent's previous convictions as bad character evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in ruling there was no case to answer as the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to infer intent to commit a sexual offence, and erred in refusing to admit bad character evidence which was highly relevant and not unfairly prejudicial given the similarity to the current offence.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Both rulings of the trial judge are set aside.
  • Case to be returned to the Crown Court for retrial before a different judge.