R v Jean Dias
[2024] EWCA Crim 1350
R v Linton Bloomfield
16 February 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 210
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of dangerous driving. He appealed, saying the trial wasn't fair and he had new evidence. The court disagreed, saying his complaints were baseless and the new evidence wasn't good enough. His conviction was upheld.
Key Facts
- •Linton Bloomfield was convicted of causing serious injury by dangerous driving on June 1st, 2023.
- •The incident involved a collision between Bloomfield's car and a cyclist, Thomas Lewis.
- •Bloomfield's defense was that Lewis caused the accident.
- •Bloomfield represented himself at trial and raised several procedural objections.
- •Bloomfield appealed his conviction, seeking to introduce fresh evidence.
- •The prosecution's case relied on witness testimony and the absence of dashcam footage.
Legal Principles
Abuse of process
R(Ibrahim) v Feltham Magistrates' Court [2001] 1 WLR 1293
Admissibility of fresh evidence
Section 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968
Outcomes
Appeal against conviction refused.
The court found the grounds of appeal wholly unarguable. No prejudice was suffered by the applicant due to the handling of the trial. The fresh evidence did not meet the requirements for admissibility under s.23 of the 1968 Act.
Applications to adduce fresh evidence refused.
The fresh evidence applications did not contain proper details of what additional evidence could be given, and did not satisfy the requirements for admissibility under s.23 of the 1968 Act.
Applications to adjourn the trial refused.
The court found that there was no justification for adjournment and that the applicant suffered no prejudice.