Haddon, R v

[2003] EWCA Crim 284

Case details

Case citations
[2003] EWCA Crim 284
Court
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Judgment date
27 January 2003
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Criminal Homicide Diminished responsibility
Keywords
fresh psychiatric evidence Criminal Cases Review Commission reference personality disorder abnormality of mind substantial impairment of responsibility murder conviction manslaughter substitution sentence adjourned
Outcome
appeal allowed; murder conviction quashed and verdict of manslaughter substituted (sentence adjourned)
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

Where fresh psychiatric evidence shows that, at the time of a killing, an offender suffered an abnormality of mind substantially impairing mental responsibility, and a jury is unlikely to have convicted of murder if it had heard that evidence, the murder conviction should be quashed. The court may then exercise its power under Criminal Appeal Act 1968 section 3 to substitute a verdict of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.

Factual background

The appellant had been convicted of murder at Birmingham Crown Court in 1980 for causing the death of his ten-week-old daughter. His renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction was dismissed in 1981.

Following a reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission under section 9 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, the Court of Appeal received fresh evidence from two psychiatrists. Each concluded that the appellant had a severe personality disorder at the time of the offence which substantially impaired his responsibility. The central question was whether that evidence would probably have led to a different verdict at trial.

Held

  1. Appeal allowed. The court held that, had the jury heard the fresh psychiatric evidence, it was unlikely to have convicted the appellant of murder.

  2. The psychiatrists’ evidence established that the appellant had, at the time of the killing, a severe and long-standing personality disorder. The disorder amounted to an abnormality of mind and substantially impaired his responsibility for his acts within section 2 of the Homicide Act 1957. The later clarity of the diagnosis did not undermine the conclusion that the basic disorder existed at the time of the offence.

  3. The murder conviction was quashed. Exercising its power under section 3 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968, the court substituted a verdict of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.

  4. Sentence was adjourned because further evidence concerning risk was to be called. The appellant was to remain in custody and the court directed that a medical report be prepared.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On a Criminal Cases Review Commission reference, allowed the appeal, quashed the murder conviction and substituted manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.

  • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On 23 January 1981, dismissed the appellant’s renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction.

  • Birmingham Crown Court: On 18 January 1980, convicted the appellant of murder and imposed life imprisonment.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
appeal allowed; murder conviction quashed and verdict of manslaughter substituted (sentence adjourned)

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.