DM v R
[2024] EWCA Crim 1187
R v Muhammed Jan
3 February 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 164
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of several serious sexual assaults. He tried to appeal his conviction, saying the evidence was weak and his lawyer was bad. The court said there was plenty of evidence against him and refused his appeal.
Key Facts
- •Mohammed Jan, aged 26, was convicted of serious sexual offences, including two counts of rape, following a trial at Derby Crown Court.
- •The offences involved four separate attacks on four different sex workers in Arboretum Park, Derby.
- •The evidence against Jan included eyewitness identifications (three out of four complainants identified him), DNA evidence matching his profile, CCTV and body-worn camera footage, and similarities in the attacks.
- •Jan initially denied involvement but later made partial admissions during police interviews, which he later claimed were lies.
- •Jan's appeal against conviction was based on claims of insufficient evidence, collusion between complainants, unreliable identification evidence, and alleged hostility from one complainant.
- •Jan also made oblique complaints about his previous legal advisors and claimed racial targeting.
Legal Principles
Reporting restrictions under the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply to protect the identity of victims of sexual offences.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
Extended sentences can be imposed under section 279 of the Sentencing Act 2020 for serious offences.
Sentencing Act 2020
Outcomes
The renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction was refused.
The Court of Appeal found the convictions to be safe, considering the overwhelming evidence against the applicant. The points raised in the appeal, such as collusion and inconsistent statements, were addressed at trial and properly considered by the jury.
The application for an extension of time to appeal was refused.
The court found no reasonable excuse for the delay of one year and four months.
A loss of time order of 28 days was imposed.
The renewed applications were deemed hopeless and should not have been made.