Lahaye, R v

Lahaye, R v

There was no unfair prejudice to the appellant in leaving section 20 as an alternative verdict to the jury, as the factual case presented was identical to that which would have been presented if section 20 had been included in the indictment. The appeal is dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Dean John Lahaye
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Wounding With Intent, Alternative Verdicts, Section 18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861, Section 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861, Section 6(3) Criminal Law Act 1967
Criminal Law Wounding With Intent Alternative Verdicts Section 18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 Section 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 Section 6(3) Criminal Law Act 1967

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Dean John Lahaye

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in leaving an alternative verdict under section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 to the jury when only section 18 was charged
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was unfairly prejudiced by the alternative verdict being left to the jury

Ratio Decidendi

There was no unfair prejudice to the appellant in leaving section 20 as an alternative verdict to the jury, as the factual case presented was identical to that which would have been presented if section 20 had been included in the indictment. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed