Search for: "v."
Results 1 - 20
of 492,406
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jul 2010, 8:42 am
Regina v Thompson, Regina v Crawford, Regina v Gomulu, Regina v Allen, Regina v Blake, Regina v Kasunga; [2010] EWCA Crim 1623; [2010] WLR (D) 183 “The collective responsibility of the jury was not confined to the verdict. [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 2:01 am
Regina v H (J); Same v Ferris; Same v W (A); Same v Walker; Same v Dan; Same v S (C); Same v Robertson; Same v P (M) [2011] EWCA Crim 2753; [2012] WLR (D) 12 “In principle, in historic or cold cases, a defendant had to be sentenced in accordance with the sentencing regime applicable at the date of sentence. [read post]
26 Jan 2009, 2:34 am
Regina v Saw; Regina v Tete-Djawu; Regina v Smith (Martin); Regina v Kassa; Regina v Younis; Regina v McPhee Court of Appeal “When sentencing defendants for domestic burglary, the judge should have in mind the impact of the offence on the victim, as well as the culpability of the defendant. [read post]
11 Feb 2009, 2:15 am
Regina v Sherif; Regina v Ali (Siraj); Regina v Ali (Muhedin); Regina v Mohamed; Regina v Abdurahman; Regina v Abdullahi Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) “The seriousness of terrorist activity about which a defendant failed to give information, rather than the extent of the information that could have been provided, was what determined the level of criminality [...] [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 1:19 am
Regina v Horncastle; Regina v Blackmore; Regina v Marquis; Regina v Graham; Regina v Carter Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) “A criminal trial could be fair although the defence did not have the opportunity of examining every prosecution witness. [read post]
17 May 2007, 4:50 am
M; Regina v. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 10:44 am
R v Mayers; R v Glasgow; R v Costelloe; R v Bahmanzadeh; R v P and others [2008] EWCA Crim 1418; [2008] WLR (D) 390 “In relation to criminal proceedings there was no power, whether under the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008 or otherwise, to admit statements of anonymous witnesses made otherwise than in oral [...] [read post]
24 Nov 2008, 10:08 am
Regina v Herbert, Regina v Harris, Regina v Hulme (Joseph), Regina v Hulme (Danny) and Regina v Mallett Court of Appeal “Even a definitive sentencing guideline was not to be used or approached as if each offence could be put into a fixed and inflexible compartment. [read post]
9 May 2007, 2:18 am
C; Regina v. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 2:35 am
Regina v Zafar; Regina v Malik; Regina v Raja; Regina v Iqbal; Regina v Butt Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) “A person possessed an article for terrorist purposes only if he possessed it in circumstances which gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that he intended it to be used for the purpose of the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism. [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 2:44 am
R v Zafar; R v Malik; R v Raja; R v Iqbal; R v Butt [2008] EWCA Crim 184; [2008] WLR (D) 51 “A person possessed an article for terrorist purposes if he possessed it in circumstances which gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that he intended it to be used for the purpose of the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 1:31 am
R v T; R v B; R v C; R v H [2009] EWCA Crim 1035; [2009] WLR (D) 19 “A criminal trial without a jury did not contravene a defendant's right to a fair trial where there was a real danger of jury tampering and proposed measures to prevent such interference did not sufficiently address [...] [read post]
13 May 2010, 2:48 am
Regina v White; Regina v Dennard; Regina v Perry; Regina v Rowbotham [2010] EWCA Crim 978; [2010] WLR (D) 120 “For the purposes of tobacco smuggling cases there was unlikely to be any incompatibility between the rules which made those liable under the Excise Goods (Holding, Movement, Warehousing and REDS) Regulations 1992 or the Tobacco Products Regulations 2001 to pay duty and those made liable by Council Directive 92/12/EEC. [read post]
4 Dec 2007, 2:59 am
R v Foster; R v Newman; R v Kempster; R v Birmingham [2007] EWCA Crim 2869 “Where the defendant admitted a lesser or different crime from that charged in the indictment it did not necessarily follow that the trial judge was obliged to leave the alternative verdict for a jury's consideration; sometimes it would be appropriate, but sometimes it would not. [read post]
3 Oct 2008, 8:36 am
Regina v Mehta; Regina v Sharman; Regina v Reardon; Regina v Ratcliff Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) “Money-launderers who offered a service to numerous criminals via bureaux de change or hawala banking were often as culpable as the criminals generating the money, if not more so, and often more culpable than those who handled the proceeds of a particular fraud. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 1:25 am
Regina v Khan (Bakish Alla); Regina v Hanif Regina v Lewthwaite; Regina v Khan (Michael Arshad); Regina v Cross Regina v Hill Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) “It was essential that trial judges should be aware at the stage of jury selection if any potential juror was, or had been a police officer or a member of the prosecuting authority or was a serving prison officer. [read post]
21 Oct 2008, 9:23 am
Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF; Same v AM; Same v AN; Same v AE [2008] EWCA Civ 1148; [2008] WLR (D) 320 “The Court of Appeal gave guidance on the proper approach to the compatibility with the right to a fair trial in art 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of hearings under s 3(10) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 to determine whether the Secretary of State for the Home Department had… [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 5:49 pm
Dukes, and Turner v. [read post]
27 Oct 2011, 2:13 pm
Dukes, and Turner v. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 8:11 am
Gutierrez and Holder v. [read post]
