Wilson, R. v

Wilson, R. v

The directions on hearsay and expert evidence, though not perfect, did not amount to material misdirection affecting the safety of the conviction. The background of domestic violence was a proper aggravating factor in setting the minimum term for murder. The grounds of appeal were not properly arguable and the sentence was not manifestly excessive.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Applicant: Gavin Arthur Wilson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Hearsay Evidence, Bad Character Evidence, Domestic Violence, Sentencing, Expert Evidence

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Gavin Arthur Wilson

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on hearsay evidence and its limitations
  2. 2 Whether inadmissible expert evidence was adduced by the prosecution
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution improperly introduced hearsay evidence from Angela Burgess

Ratio Decidendi

The directions on hearsay and expert evidence, though not perfect, did not amount to material misdirection affecting the safety of the conviction. The background of domestic violence was a proper aggravating factor in setting the minimum term for murder. The grounds of appeal were not properly arguable and the sentence was not manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed