R v Reyon Vincent & Anor

R v Reyon Vincent & Anor

The convictions under s.5(1)(c) of the Firearms Act 1968 were unsafe because the ammunition was not prohibited under s.5 and the necessary element for a conviction under s.1(1)(b)—lack of a firearms certificate—was not proved. The court had no power to substitute convictions under s.1(1)(b).

Parties
Appellant: Reyon Vincent; Appellant: Dean Vincent; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal allowed; convictions quashed
Legal Topics
Firearms Offences, Indictment Errors, Unsafe Convictions, Substitution of Verdicts
Criminal Law Firearms Offences Indictment Errors Unsafe Convictions Substitution of Verdicts

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reyon Vincent

Appellant

Dean Vincent

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether convictions under s.5(1)(c) of the Firearms Act 1968 for possession of prohibited ammunition were unsafe due to misidentification of the ammunition type
  2. 2 Whether the convictions could be substituted with convictions under s.1(1)(b) of the Firearms Act 1968

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions under s.5(1)(c) of the Firearms Act 1968 were unsafe because the ammunition was not prohibited under s.5 and the necessary element for a conviction under s.1(1)(b)—lack of a firearms certificate—was not proved. The court had no power to substitute convictions under s.1(1)(b).

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; convictions quashed

Orders

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