R v Straffen
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1952 |
| Year | 1952 |
| Court | Court of Criminal Appeal |
-
- 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
82 cases
- Chew Ming v PP
- R v Trew
- R v Peter Richard Osborne
- Junaidi Bin Abdullah v Public Prosecutor, SC
Request a trial to view additional results
10 books & journal articles
-
Subject Index
...94, 218R v Steen [2004] EWCA Crim 2341 .............62R v Stevens [2003] EWCA Crim 3738 ....... 209R v Straffen (1952) 36 Cr App R 132 .......12 5R v Sussex Justices, ex p. McCarthy [1924] 1KB 256 ............................................................107R v Swingler [1998] EWCA Crim 2......
-
Subject Index
.... . . . . . 14R vSmith [2011] EWCACrim 1296 . . . . . 371–373R vStarr [2000] 2SCR 144. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14R vStraffen [1952] 2QB 911 . . . . . . . . . . . 364–365R vStratton and Stratton(1905) . . . . . . . . . 39–40R vThakrar [2008] EWCACrim 2359 . . . . . . . . 172R vTh......
-
Hearsay, Confessions and Mobile Telephones
...evidence, ofhis guilt, but not hearsay or indeed a confession. Other evidential issues arising inthis case are reported in Rv Straffen [1952] 2 QB 911.20 As in R vKnight [2007] EWCA Crim 2307.Hearsay, Confessions and Mobile missed calls on a telephone, because it may itself be true or false......
-
Encoding similar facts - has it been worth the effort? An Australian experience
...Court of Australia 31 and statements to like effect may be found in those cases: thus, for instance, in Perry v The 27 See R v Straff en [1952] 2 QB 911 in which the "hallmark doctrine" was originally formulated. 28 (1995) 182 CLR 461 at 484. 29 [1975] AC 421 at 441. 30 Ibid at 444. 31 See ......
Request a trial to view additional results