Jamieson & Anor, R. v

The convictions are safe; Padula's evidence was properly admitted, cross-examination should not have been limited but the error did not affect safety, the note was admissible as real evidence but its exclusion did not affect safety, identification evidence was properly admitted, and joint trial was fair despite potential prejudice.

Parties: Respondent: Regina; Appellant: William John Jamieson; Appellant: Jeffrey Craig Hobden
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 07 February 2003
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeals dismissed; renewed applications refused.
Legal Topics: Robbery, Identification Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Cross Examination, Joint Trials, Fair Trial, Accomplice Evidence

Criminal Law Robbery Identification Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Cross Examination Joint Trials Fair Trial Accomplice Evidence

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Regina

Respondent

William John Jamieson

Appellant

Jeffrey Craig Hobden

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether Padula's evidence should have been excluded under section 78 of PACE
2 Whether cross-examination about the Sussex robberies should have been limited
3 Whether the note passed by Jamieson to Hobden was admissible as real evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; renewed applications refused.

Orders

Convictions of Jamieson and Hobden upheld.
No severance of trial.