Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Adel Yussuf & Ors

[2023] EWCA Crim 339
Three men robbed a house, one with a fake gun. One man (Orji) admitted his guilt. Another (Yussuf) tried to say he wasn't there, but the court said there was enough evidence. The judge gave Orji a longer sentence because he was the ringleader and was considered dangerous, and the other two (Yussuf and Olubode) got shorter sentences because they weren't the leaders.

Key Facts

  • Adel Yussuf, Samuel Olubode, and George Orji were convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery and conspiracy to possess an imitation firearm.
  • The robbery involved four men, one with an imitation firearm, targeting a man's home, stealing valuables.
  • The case against Yussuf, Olubode, and the others was largely circumstantial, relying on cell site data, ANPR evidence, tracker device information, and Yussuf's lie in an interview.
  • Orji pleaded guilty and admitted to being the man with the firearm.
  • Yussuf presented an alibi witness, but the judge properly directed the jury on how to consider this evidence.
  • Orji received an extended determinate sentence of 15 years and 6 months (10.5 years custody and 5 years extended licence).
  • Yussuf and Olubode received 13-year sentences.

Legal Principles

Conspiracy requires agreement with another person to pursue a course of conduct that would amount to an offence.

Judge's directions to the jury

In a conspiracy case, the jury must be sure the defendant agreed to play some part in the conspiracy, knowing the nature of the crime.

Judge's directions to the jury

A jury can draw inferences from a defendant's silence at trial.

Judge's directions to the jury

Sentencing for robbery in a dwelling considers culpability and harm caused, with aggravating factors (e.g., use of a firearm) and mitigating factors.

Sentencing Council guidelines; Judge's sentencing remarks

An extended sentence can be imposed if there is a significant risk to the public of serious harm from further offences.

Sentencing legislation; Judge's sentencing remarks

Disparity in sentencing requires demonstrating that right-thinking members of the public would consider there to be a miscarriage of justice.

Saliuka [2014] EWCA Crim 1907

Outcomes

Yussuf's appeal against conviction dismissed.

The judge's directions to the jury were unambiguous and the circumstantial evidence supported the conviction. The jury's consideration of the alibi evidence ruled out conviction based on post-robbery actions.

Orji's appeal against sentence dismissed.

The judge implicitly considered a determinate sentence but concluded that an extended sentence was necessary due to Orji's leading role, use of a firearm, previous convictions, and lack of remorse. A later conviction is irrelevant to the 2021 sentencing.

Yussuf and Olubode's renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence refused.

The starting points for their sentences were appropriate given the circumstances. There was no significant sentencing disparity with Orji’s sentence, considering their equal participation in the robbery.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.