Joy Lewis

Barrister

Joy practices in all areas of criminal defence, with an emphasis on serious violent crime, drugs and public order offences, as well as a developing fraud practice.

She is instructed alone and as a led junior, and appears before the appellate courts.

Joy is known for her outstanding client care and robust advocacy in defence of her clients. She has a particular interest in representing young and vulnerable clients, and has experience working with clients with mental health disorders, including appointment by the court to represent defendants found ‘unfit’ to stand trial.

Recent instructions include a multi-handed false imprisonment trial, a large-scale Class A drugs conspiracy, and as a led junior in an extensive investigation into fraud in the care system.

Education

LLM International Criminal Justice and Armed Conflict, University of Nottingham, Distinction (2015)
BPTC, Nottingham Law School (2014)
GDL, Nottingham Law School, Distinction (2013)
BA History, University of Sheffield (2007)

Awards

Lord Denning Scholar of Lincoln’s Inn
Nottingham Law School BPTC Advocacy Prize, 2014
Blackstone's National Criminal Advocacy Competition Winner, 2013

Memberships

Criminal Bar Association

Languages

French

R v AD – Junior counsel in a multi-handed fraud trial involving complex issues of admissibility under s.76 PACE 1984, which required a week-long voir dire and contested expert evidence to resolve. Client was acquitted after trial.
R v AK – Client acquitted of possession with intent to supply nitrous oxide under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. This was the first case to hear disputed expert evidence on the question of whether nitrous oxide is a psychoactive substance for the purposes of the 2016 Act, and formed part of the debate around the interpretation of what was, at the time, a controversial new law. The trial involved extensive cross-examination of eminent experts in the field of neuropsychopharmacology.
R v BR – Perjury trial involving complex hearsay evidence arguments arising from family court proceedings before the High Court.
R v CJ – Successfully advanced self-defence on behalf of a young woman of previous good character charged with s.20 wounding involving a meat cleaver, following a background of domestic abuse.
R v DH – Appeal against sentence before the Court of Appeal Criminal Division, relating to the appropriate approach to sentencing for offences committed under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 in respect of nitrous oxide.
R v HB – Led in a 6-week armed robbery trial involving the use of a firearm to steal a safe from a public house. The case involved extensive cell site and phone download evidence.
R v HP – Secured acquittal as junior counsel in an £8m Royal Mail fraud. Client, an employee of Royal Mail, was accused of accepting bribes in order to facilitate this large scale fraud on the part of a large web-based company. The prosecution relied heavily upon the evidence of the manager of the company, who had previously pleaded guilty to the fraud.
R v MJ – Client sentenced to 24 months imprisonment for arson reckless as to endangering life. A complex sentencing exercise for a vulnerable client with a background of mental health and drug dependency issues.
R v ML – Secured a suspended sentence for a young client in a multi-handed conspiracy to commit moped-facilitated commercial burglaries.
R v MP – Successfully defended a young client charged with possession of Class A drugs with intent to supply and possession of an offensive weapon, after he was stopped by police in a vehicle in possession of the items.
R v PP – Large-scale drugs conspiracy involving extensive observation evidence.
R v RM [2018] EWCA Crim 1588 – Appeal against conviction before the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), challenging the rejection by the trial Judge of a submission of no case to answer in respect of an offence of allowing premises to be used for the supply of drugs. Reported in Crimeline.
R v SS – Secured an acquittal following a 5-week trial on behalf of a vulnerable client charged with involvement in a serious double false imprisonment committed in the presence of a young child.
R v TF – Appointed by the court to represent the defendant, who had been found unfit to stand trial for arson with intent to kill. Acquitted by a jury following an ‘actus reus’ trial involving extensive legal argument relating to the admissibility of confessions. Successfully appealed before the Costs Judge in respect of the Legal Aid Authority’s refusal to remunerate counsel as a court-appointed advocate. That decision is currently subject to further appeal before the High Court.