Ahmed & Ors, R. v

Ahmed & Ors, R. v

The section 34 direction was appropriate given the evidence and cross-examination; the cross-examination of R was not unfair and did not render the conviction unsafe; the verdicts were not inconsistent; the sentencing judge erred in categorising the harm as 'serious' and in the discounts applied for youth, requiring adjustment of sentences.

Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: Sharmarke Ahmed; Appellant: Muridi Abdelkadir Mohamed Bahdon; Appellant: R; Appellant: G
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeals against sentence allowed in part
Legal Topics
Robbery, Sentencing, Youth Offenders, Joint Enterprise, Adverse Inference, Appeal Against Conviction, Appeal Against Sentence
Criminal Law Robbery Sentencing Youth Offenders Joint Enterprise Adverse Inference Appeal Against Conviction Appeal Against Sentence

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Respondent

Sharmarke Ahmed

Appellant

Muridi Abdelkadir Mohamed Bahdon

Appellant

R

Appellant

G

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in giving a section 34 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 direction
  2. 2 Whether the cross-examination of a young defendant was unfair
  3. 3 Whether the verdicts were inconsistent

Ratio Decidendi

The section 34 direction was appropriate given the evidence and cross-examination; the cross-examination of R was not unfair and did not render the conviction unsafe; the verdicts were not inconsistent; the sentencing judge erred in categorising the harm as 'serious' and in the discounts applied for youth, requiring adjustment of sentences.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeals against sentence allowed in part

Orders

  • R’s conviction appeal dismissed
  • R’s sentence reduced to 2 years 11 months 12 days’ detention