R v ABR
[2024] EWCA Crim 625
AAB v R
26 July 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 880
Court of Appeal
A woman was wrongly convicted of a drug crime years ago because she was forced to do it by traffickers. A court now agrees she was a victim, not a criminal, and cancels her conviction.
Key Facts
- •AAB, a Vietnamese national, pleaded guilty to producing cannabis in 2007.
- •She was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment and recommended for deportation.
- •AAB was subsequently found to be a victim of modern slavery.
- •She appeals her conviction, seeking to adduce fresh evidence and an extension of time.
- •The fresh evidence includes a conclusive grounds decision that she was trafficked for forced criminality.
Legal Principles
Anonymity orders can be granted under s.11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 to protect the interests of justice.
s.11 Contempt of Court Act 1981
A plea of guilty does not remove the court's jurisdiction to hear an appeal against conviction.
R v Lee (Bruce George) [1984] 1 W.L.R. 578
The test for admissibility of fresh evidence is set out in s.23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968.
s.23 Criminal Appeal Act 1968
The Modern Slavery Act 2015 created a defence based on compulsion to commit offences due to trafficking.
Modern Slavery Act 2015, s.45
In pre-2015 trafficking cases, courts consider whether prosecution was in the public interest, the nexus between trafficking and the offence, and the availability of alternatives.
R v Joseph & ors [2017] EWCA Crim 36
A conclusive grounds decision regarding trafficking is not binding on the court, but should be considered unless contradicted by evidence.
R v L(C), N, N & T, 2013
Outcomes
Anonymity order granted.
To protect AAB from re-trafficking.
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed.
The court found AAB was compelled to commit the offence due to being trafficked, and prosecution was not in the public interest.
Extension of time granted.
Unusual circumstances and merit in the ground of appeal justified the delay.