Miller & Anor, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 794 (21 June 2024)

Miller & Anor, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 794 (21 June 2024)

The trial judge was correct to withdraw the statutory defences under section 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 from the jury as they were not available on the facts; the judge properly directed the jury on the law regarding use of force and citizen's arrest; the admission of hearsay evidence and directions on bad character evidence were legally correct and did not render the convictions unsafe.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 794
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Samuel Miller; Applicant: James Moss
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
applications for leave to appeal against conviction refused
Legal Topics
False Imprisonment, Use of Force, Citizen's Arrest, Hearsay Evidence, Bad Character Evidence, Appeals
Criminal Law False Imprisonment Use of Force Citizen's Arrest Hearsay Evidence Bad Character Evidence Appeals

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Samuel Miller

Applicant

James Moss

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in withdrawing defences under section 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 from the jury
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on the reasonableness of force by reference to R v Jones [2006] UKHL 16
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting hearsay evidence under section 116 Criminal Justice Act 2003

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was correct to withdraw the statutory defences under section 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 from the jury as they were not available on the facts; the judge properly directed the jury on the law regarding use of force and citizen's arrest; the admission of hearsay evidence and directions on bad character evidence were legally correct and did not render the convictions unsafe.

Court Disposition

applications for leave to appeal against conviction refused