R v Leroy and R v Graham

The appeals before the court involved two defendants, Leroy and Graham, who had been convicted of various criminal offences including affray, maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The convictions were appealed on the basis that the verdicts were unreasonable or could not be supported by the evidence. Leroy also appealed against the severity of his sentence, arguing it was manifestly excessive, while Graham contested the appropriateness of cumulative sentencing.

The legal issues before the court included the admissibility of identification evidence where no identification parade was held and the weight to be given to such evidence in light of its probative value and potential prejudicial effect. The court had to determine whether the identification evidence was sufficiently reliable to support the verdicts. Additionally, the court considered whether Leroy's sentence was manifestly excessive, taking into account special circumstances and the appropriateness of cumulative sentences in relation to multiple offences.

The court found that the identification evidence, despite the absence of a formal identification parade, was highly probative and its value outweighed any prejudicial effect. The court held that the identification evidence was reliable enough to support the verdicts. Regarding the sentence, the court concluded that while the sentence was severe, it was not manifestly excessive given the nature and circumstances of the offences. The court also determined that it was appropriate to impose cumulative sentences for the multiple offences committed by Leroy and Graham.

The appeals were dismissed, and the convictions and sentences were upheld. The court found no error in the trial judge's handling of the identification evidence or in the imposition of the sentences. The defendants' appeals were unsuccessful, and the original verdicts and sentences were confirmed.