Momi v The The Queen

This appeal concerns three defendants who were convicted of various charges following a violent altercation. Mr Momi appeals against his conviction on all three charges, contending the jury's verdicts were unreasonable. In the event his conviction appeal is dismissed, Mr Momi appeals against his sentence arguing that the starting point of eight years, six months' imprisonment which the Judge adopted was manifestly excessive. He contends the starting point ought to have been the same as for Mr Amandeep Singh, namely seven years' imprisonment. Mr Amandeep Singh also appeals against his conviction on all three charges. He contends that a miscarriage of justice occurred as a result of what the prosecutor said to the jury in his closing address about identification evidence which was signalled in opening, but not given in evidence. Mr Dhillon accepts the jury's verdict but appeals against the Judge's refusal to grant him a discharge without conviction. He accepts the decision is unimpeachable on the basis of the information that was before the Judge. However, he applies to adduce further evidence in support of his appeal which he says demonstrates that the consequences of a conviction are significantly more serious than the Judge understood. The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Momi's appeal against his conviction on all three charges and his appeal against sentence. The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Singh's appeal against conviction. The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Dhillon's appeal against the Judge's refusal to discharge him without conviction. The Court of Appeal granted Mr Dhillon's application to adduce further evidence in support of his appeal against the Judge's refusal to discharge him without conviction.