Notable Cases

Leah Connolly represents a client, RR, with vulnerabilities and successfully challenged the CPS decision to prosecute leading them to discontinue the case. 

Our client receives favourable outcome on a case where his Suspended Sentence could have been activated, and breach of Criminal Behaviour Order punished.

A successful outcome was achieved by negotiation that reduced the benefit figure by £770k and available amount by £320k and avoided a hidden assets finding.

Our client was arrested at a protest. She was of good character and made admissions, yet the CPS still prosecuted. After representations by Leah, the CPS dropped the case against our client.

SMW is pleased to announce a significant victory in the landmark extradition case concerning our client, which has set a precedent on the issue of prison conditions in Türkiye. This case, along with two others, has been recognized as a lead case on the matter, highlighting the critical human rights concerns associated with extradition to Türkiye.

Our client, a UK-registered company with valuable concessions to mine gold in west Africa, was referred to us after one of its UK HSBC business accounts was frozen ex parte.

The complainant was the defendant's step-granddaughter. This trial involved witnesses from the family, and involved the instruction of specialist medical experts.

After a 5-day trial, our client was acquitted at Snaresbrook Crown Court. His charges included rape and sexual assault by penetration.

R v J 2024 – We made a successful application to dismiss on an aggravated burglary in which the defendants were said to have driven across counties and held up the complainants with a firearm and a machete.

R v Y 2024 – Our vulnerable client was unanimously acquitted of rape and Voyeurism following a 4 day trial.

Two successful representations in the month of July for SMW in respect of POCA civil recovery proceedings. One involved a client who was a registered charity, and the other an individual who had more than £43,000 seized by HMRC.

R v A – Our client was serving a 50 month sentence for drugs offences when further dated charges were brought against him. Following our representations and counsel’s submissions, he received a sentence to run concurrently with his 50 month sentence, meaning he would not serve any additional time in custody and maintained his release date.