![202501491 B4 - [2025] EWCA Crim 969](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_sHeHK8V.png){kind=logo}
The Grounds of Appeal
The Grounds of Appeal
The appellant contends that the judge erred in
Finding that it was lawful for the appellant to be retried for murder. The judge should have followed the decision in Bayode as the circumstances were more closely aligned to the facts of the present case. It is submitted that R v McEvilly can be distinguished as:
The facts and circumstances of that case are completely different from the present case.
In McEvilly, there had been no finality in the jury’s consideration of the more serious count.
Failing to find that the crown’s decision to retry the appellant in these circumstances amounted to an abuse of the court’s process.