BRIAN ROBERT McLEAY v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2000] ScotHC 19 (18th February, 2000)
The sheriff's charge did not result in an unjustified imbalance or miscarriage of justice. The sheriff did not misdirect the jury regarding the Shropshire connection, which was not treated as per se incriminating but as a factor relevant to the Moorov doctrine. No misdirection or miscarriage of justice occurred.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] ScotHC 19
- Parties
- Appellant: Brian Robert MacLeay; Respondent: Her Majesty's Advocate
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Reset, Fraud, Misdirection, Jury Charge, Moorov Doctrine
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Brian Robert MacLeay
Appellant
Her Majesty's Advocate
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sheriff's charge to the jury was unbalanced and constituted a misdirection
- 2 Whether the sheriff misdirected the jury regarding criminative circumstances and the significance of the Shropshire connection
Ratio Decidendi
The sheriff's charge did not result in an unjustified imbalance or miscarriage of justice. The sheriff did not misdirect the jury regarding the Shropshire connection, which was not treated as per se incriminating but as a factor relevant to the Moorov doctrine. No misdirection or miscarriage of justice occurred.
Court Disposition
appeal refused
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