Workman v R. [2014] EWCA Crim 575 (28 March 2014)
The proposed fresh evidence (computer, medical, biomechanics) does not render the conviction unsafe; the defence team made a reasonable tactical decision not to adduce biomechanical evidence at trial; the trial judge was correct not to leave loss of control to the jury; the conviction is safe.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] EWCA Crim 575
- Parties
- Appellant: Ian Garth Workman; Respondent: The Crown
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 28 March 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Fresh Evidence, Expert Evidence, Murder, Loss of Control Defence, Unsafe Conviction, Appeal Procedure
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ian Garth Workman
Appellant
The Crown
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for murder is unsafe in light of fresh expert evidence
- 2 Whether the trial judge erred in not leaving the defence of loss of control to the jury
- 3 Whether leave should be granted to adduce new expert evidence on appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The proposed fresh evidence (computer, medical, biomechanics) does not render the conviction unsafe; the defence team made a reasonable tactical decision not to adduce biomechanical evidence at trial; the trial judge was correct not to leave loss of control to the jury; the conviction is safe.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Leave to adduce fresh biomechanical evidence refused
- Conviction for murder upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment