Fanta & Anor v The Queen

Fanta & Anor v The Queen

The cut-throat defence and bad character application were inevitable and properly made with the appellants' instructions. The bad character evidence against Mr Iutes was admissible as it had substantial probative value regarding the issue of who placed the drugs in the lorry. Although the judge's directions on bad character evidence could have been fuller, they were sufficient in the context of the case and did not render the convictions unsafe. There was no evidence of incompetence or misconduct by trial counsel that would undermine the safety of the convictions.

Parties
First Appellant: Adrian Fanta; Second Appellant: Gabriel Iutes; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Cut Throat Defence, Joint Enterprise, Appeal Against Conviction, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Bad Character Evidence Cut Throat Defence Joint Enterprise Appeal Against Conviction Jury Directions

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adrian Fanta

First Appellant

Gabriel Iutes

Second Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial counsel for Mr Fanta acted incompetently or without instructions in advancing a cut-throat defence and bad character application against Mr Iutes
  2. 2 Whether the admission of bad character evidence against Mr Iutes was proper under section 101(1)(e) Criminal Justice Act 2003
  3. 3 Whether the judge's directions to the jury regarding bad character evidence were adequate

Ratio Decidendi

The cut-throat defence and bad character application were inevitable and properly made with the appellants' instructions. The bad character evidence against Mr Iutes was admissible as it had substantial probative value regarding the issue of who placed the drugs in the lorry. Although the judge's directions on bad character evidence could have been fuller, they were sufficient in the context of the case and did not render the convictions unsafe. There was no evidence of incompetence or misconduct by trial counsel that would undermine the safety of the convictions.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Extensions of time and leave to appeal granted
  • Appeals against conviction dismissed