EE, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1345 (23 October 2024)

EE, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1345 (23 October 2024)

The trial judge was entitled to conclude, after rigorous evaluation of all the evidence, that there was insufficient evidence of loss of control to leave that defence to the jury. The minimum term of 25 years was manifestly excessive in light of the mitigation and circumstances, and a minimum term of 21 years was substituted.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 1345
Parties
Appellant: EE; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction refused; appeal against sentence allowed in part
Legal Topics
Murder, Loss of Control Defence, Sentencing, Diminished Responsibility

Case Brief

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EE

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in law by not leaving the partial defence of loss of control to the jury
  2. 2 Whether the 25-year minimum term sentence was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to conclude, after rigorous evaluation of all the evidence, that there was insufficient evidence of loss of control to leave that defence to the jury. The minimum term of 25 years was manifestly excessive in light of the mitigation and circumstances, and a minimum term of 21 years was substituted.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction refused; appeal against sentence allowed in part

Orders

  • Renewed application for leave to appeal conviction refused
  • Sentence of 25 years quashed and substituted with a minimum term of 21 years less 506 days spent on remand