R v Amado-Taylor
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 2000 |
| Year | 2000 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
37 cases
- Walker v HM Advocate
-
R v Andre Williams Anthony Best
...submitted the judge had not attempted, as he was bound to do, to marshal the facts and arrange them issue by issue as recommended in R v Ian Amado-Taylor [2000] 2 Cr.App.R 189. In fact Amado-Taylor was a very different case from the present. In that case the trial judge did not attempt to r......
-
Pedro Perara-Cathcart(Appellant) v The Queen
...93Subramaniam v The Queen (2004) 79 ALJR 116 at 124 [38]–[39], 125–126 [41]–[42]; 211 ALR 1 at 11, 13; [2004] HCA 51; Amado-Taylor [2000] 2 Cr App R 189 at 191 per Henry LJ. 94Stokes & Difford (1990) 51 A Crim R 25 at 32 per Hunt J (Wood and McInerney JJ agreeing at 45). See and compare, in......
-
Nurse v The Queen
...the Privy Council in Langford and Freeman v. The State (2005) 66 WIR 194 at para.[23]. As Henry LJ emphasised in Amado-Taylor v. R. (2000) 2 Cr. App. R. 189, at 191: “It is never appropriate, however, for a summing up to be a mere rehearsal of the evidence.” 23 It is part of the function of......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
When Should a Retrial be Permitted After a Conviction is Quashed on Appeal?
...1254 (both sexual o¡ence cases involving child witnesses), but there is noreported discussion of the issue.147 See RvAmado-Taylor [2000] 2 CrApp R 189where a retrial was ordered by the court‘with heavyhearts’ (195).148 As it is in both the English and Scottish prosecution codes: Codefor Cro......