R v Ryan Stevens

R v Ryan Stevens

The conviction on count 3 is unsafe because the jury was not properly directed to consider the issue of consent and reasonable belief in consent, nor were they clearly instructed to consider each count separately. The Route to Verdict and subsequent directions failed to clarify these essential elements, creating a real risk that the jury convicted without proper consideration of the legal requirements.

Parties
Appellant: Ryan Stevens; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Jury Directions, Consent in Sexual Offences, Appeal Against Conviction, Assault by Penetration
Criminal Law Jury Directions Consent in Sexual Offences Appeal Against Conviction Assault by Penetration

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ryan Stevens

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge failed to properly direct the jury on the need to consider each count separately
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge failed to direct the jury on the necessity to be sure of the absence of consent or reasonable belief in consent for count 3 (assault by penetration)
  3. 3 Whether the conviction on count 3 is unsafe due to inadequate jury directions

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction on count 3 is unsafe because the jury was not properly directed to consider the issue of consent and reasonable belief in consent, nor were they clearly instructed to consider each count separately. The Route to Verdict and subsequent directions failed to clarify these essential elements, creating a real risk that the jury convicted without proper consideration of the legal requirements.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; retrial ordered

Orders

  • Conviction on count 3 quashed
  • Retrial on count 3 ordered