Castle, R v

Castle, R v

The conviction for arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered cannot stand because the trial judge directed the jury according to the objective test in Caldwell, which was overruled by R v G. The proper test is subjective recklessness. The evidence proved the appellant intended to damage property, so a verdict of guilty of criminal damage with intent to damage property is substituted.

Parties
Appellant: Mark Anthony Castle; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction for arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered quashed; substituted conviction for criminal damage with intent to damage property; sentence reduced
Legal Topics
Arson, Recklessness, Criminal Damage, Appeal, Sentencing
Criminal Law Arson Recklessness Criminal Damage Appeal Sentencing

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Anthony Castle

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered was safe in light of the House of Lords decision in R v G revising the test for recklessness
  2. 2 Whether a new trial should be ordered or a verdict of simple criminal damage substituted
  3. 3 Appropriate sentence following substitution of verdict

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction for arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered cannot stand because the trial judge directed the jury according to the objective test in Caldwell, which was overruled by R v G. The proper test is subjective recklessness. The evidence proved the appellant intended to damage property, so a verdict of guilty of criminal damage with intent to damage property is substituted.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction for arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered quashed; substituted conviction for criminal damage with intent to damage property; sentence reduced

Orders

  • Conviction for arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered quashed
  • Verdict of guilty of criminal damage with intent to damage property substituted