Vincent & Anor, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 258 (22 February 2024)

Convictions under s.5(1)(c) Firearms Act 1968 were unsafe as the ammunition was not prohibited under that section and the indictment was defective; there was no evidence to support substitution under s.1(1)(b) as lack of a firearms certificate was not proved.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2024] EWCA Crim 258
Parties: Appellant: Reyon Vincent; Appellant: Dean Vincent; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 22 February 2024
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Conviction; Full Court Determination
Outcome: appeal allowed; convictions quashed
Legal Topics: Firearms Offences, Mischarging, Unsafe Conviction, Substitution of Verdict

Criminal Law Firearms Offences Mischarging Unsafe Conviction Substitution of Verdict

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2

Parties

Reyon Vincent

Appellant

Dean Vincent

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Conviction; Full Court Determination

Legal Issues

1 Whether convictions for possession of prohibited ammunition under s.5(1)(c) Firearms Act 1968 were unsafe due to mischarging.
2 Whether convictions could be substituted for lesser offences under s.1(1)(b) Firearms Act 1968.

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; convictions quashed

Orders

Dean Vincent's convictions on Counts 3, 4 and 5 are quashed.
Reyon Vincent's conviction on Count 5 is quashed.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.