McKenzie v R

McKenzie v R

Although the trial judge wrongly admitted some general bad character evidence and gave a summing up that overemphasised it, the conviction was not unsafe given the strength of the direct evidence against the appellant and the improbabilities in his account. The evidence of past bad driving was of limited relevance and should have been handled with greater caution, but did not render the conviction unsafe in this case.

Parties
Appellant: Mark Anthony Robert McKenzie; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Dangerous Driving, Bad Character Evidence, Propensity, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Dangerous Driving Bad Character Evidence Propensity Admissibility of 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Anthony Robert McKenzie

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of past bad driving (bad character evidence) was admissible under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 in a prosecution for causing death by dangerous driving
  2. 2 Whether the admission of such evidence rendered the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

Although the trial judge wrongly admitted some general bad character evidence and gave a summing up that overemphasised it, the conviction was not unsafe given the strength of the direct evidence against the appellant and the improbabilities in his account. The evidence of past bad driving was of limited relevance and should have been handled with greater caution, but did not render the conviction unsafe in this case.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; conviction upheld