R v Henderson Domingo
[2024] EWCA Crim 587
R v Precious Enoch
4 November 2022
[2022] EWCA Crim 1585
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of robbery. A witness said the man gave him the stolen bank cards, and the man's DNA was found on the victim's sweater. Even though the witness wasn't entirely reliable, the court said there was enough evidence for the jury to find him guilty.
Key Facts
- •Precious Enoch convicted of robbery and possession of a bladed article at Luton Crown Court on 14 January 2022.
- •Sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment.
- •Robbery involved a knife, theft of purse and mobile phone from complainant's home.
- •Ishmail Omar used complainant's bank cards shortly after robbery, stating Enoch gave him the cards.
- •Enoch's DNA found on complainant's sweater; prosecution argued this linked him to the crime.
- •Enoch's defense claimed Omar was responsible and that DNA transfer was innocent.
- •Omar gave inconsistent evidence during the trial.
Legal Principles
Submission of no case to answer - whether a properly directed jury could safely convict based on the evidence.
Section 8 of the Theft Act 1968; Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988
Outcomes
Appeal refused.
The Court of Appeal found sufficient evidence for the jury to convict, despite inconsistencies in Omar's testimony. The combination of Omar's statement, DNA evidence, and complainant's testimony allowed the jury to reach a verdict. The inconsistencies were matters for the jury to consider.
Application for extension of time granted.
The 11-day delay in applying for leave to appeal was not attributable to the applicant.