R v Smith (Brian Peter)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE HENRY |
| Judgment Date | 04 December 1996 |
| Neutral Citation | [1996] EWCA Crim J1204-5 |
| Docket Number | No: 96/6163/W5 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Date | 04 December 1996 |
-
- 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
4 cases
-
R v Henry Paul McGrath
...there was no misjoinder under Section 40(1), so that these observations although strongly persuasive are, strictly speaking, obiter. 29 In R v Smith [1997] 1 Cr App R 390 Henry LJ applied Callaghan and disapproved Newland and Lewis. Callaghan was stated to be binding authority, and the cou......
-
Bounds v R
...78 Cr App R 305 at 311. See also R v Newland [1988] QB 402; R v Follett [1989] QB 338. 55 (1992) Criminal Law Review 191 at 192. 56 [1997] 1 Cr App R 390 at 57 [1997] 1 Cr App R 390 at 394–395. 58 474 US 438 (1986). 59Kotteakos v United States 328 US 750 at 776 (1946). 60 [2005] WASCA 1 at ......
-
Bryan (Steven), Smith (Searchwell) v R
...resulting from such an indictment is a nullity. Newland was followed in R v O'Reiley 90 Cr.App.R.40. However, in R v Smith (B.P) [1997] 1 Cr. App. R. 390 it was held that Newland was wrongly decided in so far as it held that misjoinder would invalidate all convictions on the indictment. Th......
-
R v Jerry J
...convictions on other counts in the indictment will not be affected." Two cases are referred to: Callaghan 94 Cr App R 226 and Smith [1997] 1 Cr App R 390. At most, then, the appellant would be entitled to have his conviction on count 4 alone quashed if this point were made good. 21 However,......