Moon -v- AG 11-Sep-2006 [2006] JCA 126 (11 September 2006)

Moon -v- AG 11-Sep-2006 [2006] JCA 126 (11 September 2006)

The conviction was quashed because material evidence in the possession of the Crown, which could have been advantageous to the defence in cross-examination and potentially affected the outcome, was not disclosed prior to trial, rendering the conviction unsafe.

Citation
[2006] JCA 126
Parties
Appellant: Robert John Ingram Moon; Respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
11 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Disclosure Obligations, Drug Offences, Appeal Against Conviction
Criminal Law Disclosure Obligations Drug Offences Appeal Against Conviction

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert John Ingram Moon

Appellant

The Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to disclose material evidence by the prosecution rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether the undisclosed material could have affected the outcome of the trial

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was quashed because material evidence in the possession of the Crown, which could have been advantageous to the defence in cross-examination and potentially affected the outcome, was not disclosed prior to trial, rendering the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • conviction quashed