Fernandes v AG [2021] JCA 164 (07 June 2021)
There was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude the complainant did not consent and was incapable of consenting due to intoxication; the appellant's belief in consent was not reasonable in the circumstances; the verdicts on the two counts reflected the differing evidence and were not inconsistent; no miscarriage of justice or error of law occurred.
- Citation
- [2021] JCA 164
- Parties
- Appellant: Mark Fernandes; Respondent: The Attorney General
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 07 June 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- application for leave to appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Rape, Consent, Intoxication, Reasonable Belief, Jury Directions, Inconsistent Verdicts
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mark Fernandes
Appellant
The Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence for the jury to convict on the issue of consent
- 2 Whether the jury gave sufficient weight to evidence supporting the appellant's belief in consent
- 3 Whether the jury's verdicts on two counts were logically inconsistent
Ratio Decidendi
There was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude the complainant did not consent and was incapable of consenting due to intoxication; the appellant's belief in consent was not reasonable in the circumstances; the verdicts on the two counts reflected the differing evidence and were not inconsistent; no miscarriage of justice or error of law occurred.
Court Disposition
application for leave to appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment