R v Ajaypal Singh
[2024] EWCA Crim 320
R v Henderson Domingo
16 May 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 587
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of several robberies. He appealed, arguing mistakes were made during his trial. The Court of Appeal reviewed the case and found no serious errors, so they refused to overturn the conviction.
Key Facts
- •Applicant convicted of four robberies, two attempted robberies, and possessing a bladed article.
- •Sentence: 14 years' imprisonment and £14,881.09 forfeiture.
- •Robberies targeted supermarkets between October 2020 and February 2021.
- •Prosecution relied on witness descriptions, CCTV, cell site data, and cash found in applicant's safe.
- •Applicant denied all charges, raising issues of misidentification and providing alibis.
- •Applicant sought to adduce fresh evidence from two witnesses.
- •Applicant criticised his trial representation and the judge's summing-up.
Legal Principles
Standard for granting leave to appeal against conviction: The conviction must be unsafe.
Court of Appeal Criminal Division
Test for admissibility of fresh evidence: Good reason must be shown for its admission at this stage, and the trial is not a dress rehearsal.
Court of Appeal Criminal Division
Directions on circumstantial evidence must be in accordance with established authority and properly given.
Court of Appeal Criminal Division
Outcomes
Application for an extension of time to appeal refused.
No arguable grounds of appeal against conviction; the judge's rulings and summing-up were fair and balanced; fresh evidence inadmissible.
Renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused.
The applicant's disagreement with the jury's verdict is not grounds for interference by the Court of Appeal; no evidence to suggest the conviction was unsafe.