Marcus, R v [2013] NICA 60 (24 October 2013)

Marcus, R v [2013] NICA 60 (24 October 2013)

The trial judge's directions on intent, the elements of the offences, credibility, and circumstantial evidence were adequate and did not render the conviction unsafe. The use of 'envisage' did not mislead the jury as to the requirement of intent, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.

Citation
[2013] NICA 60
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Appellant: Gareth Edward Marcus
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
24 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused on other grounds
Legal Topics
Explosive Substances, Intent, Circumstantial Evidence, Jury Directions, Unsafe Conviction
Criminal Law Explosive Substances Intent Circumstantial Evidence Jury Directions Unsafe 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Gareth Edward Marcus

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on intent by using 'envisage' instead of 'intend'
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on the elements of causing an explosion likely to endanger life or cause serious injury to property
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge failed to properly direct the jury on credibility and circumstantial evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's directions on intent, the elements of the offences, credibility, and circumstantial evidence were adequate and did not render the conviction unsafe. The use of 'envisage' did not mislead the jury as to the requirement of intent, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused on other grounds

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Leave to appeal refused on additional grounds