De La Haye v Att. Gen. [1996] JLR 163 (24 April 1996)

De La Haye v Att. Gen. [1996] JLR 163 (24 April 1996)

Evidence from an identification parade, even if improperly conducted, is not automatically excluded; its admission is at the discretion of the trial judge.

Citation
[1996] JLR 163
Parties
Applicant: De La Haye; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
24 April 1996
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
evidence admitted
Legal Topics
Identification Parade, Admissibility of 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

De La Haye

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether evidence from an improperly conducted identification parade should be admitted

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence from an identification parade, even if improperly conducted, is not automatically excluded; its admission is at the discretion of the trial judge.

Court Disposition

evidence admitted