R V Grantham
574 [1969] [COURTS-MARTIAL APPEAL COURT] "• REGINA v. GRANTHAM 1969 Feb. 20; March 20 Lord Parker C.J., Widgery L.J. and Lawton J. Military Law—Courts-Martial Appeal Court—Jurisdiction—Right -n of appeal to—Whether single right—Determination of appeal or application—Whether jurisdiction to reopen—Applications for leave to appeal dismissed on merits—Further application based on fresh evidence—Whether court functus officio—Courts- Martial {Appeals) Act, 1968 (c. 20), ss. 8 (1) (2), 9, 11 (2), 28 (1) (2), 34, 36—Criminal Appeal Act, 1968 (c. 19), s. 17—Courts- Martial Appeal Rules, 1968 (S.I. 1968, No. 1071), r. 5—Criminal Appeal Rules, 1968 (S.I. 1968, No. 1262), r. 10 (4). r Crime—Court of Appeal—Jurisdiction—Application for leave to ^ appeal dismissed on merits — Determination — Practice — Whether jurisdiction to hear second application—Fresh evidence —Reference by Secretary of State. Section 8 of the Courts-Martial (Appeals) Act, 1968,* con fers a single right of appeal which incorporates a right to apply once only for leave to appeal under section 9 (post, p. 580D). Where, therefore, a defendant, whose application for leave D to appeal against conviction was refused on its merits by the full court, subsequently sought an extension of time in which to make a second application for leave to appeal against con viction, and requested the court to hear fresh evidence: — Held, that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the applications (post, p. 578D). Reg. v. Moore [1957] 1 W.L.R. 841; [1957] 2 All E.R. 703, CCA.
[Show full text]