Taylor, R. v

Taylor, R. v

The conviction under section 18 was unsafe due to a clear and accepted misdirection to the jury regarding the requisite intent, and insufficient evidence to prove intent to cause really serious bodily injury beyond reasonable doubt.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Mark Taylor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction under section 18 quashed; conviction under section 20 substituted; sentence imposed
Legal Topics
Unlawful Wounding, Intent, Jury Direction, Appeal, Offences Against the Person Act
Criminal Law Unlawful Wounding Intent Jury Direction Appeal Offences Against the Person Act

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Mark Taylor

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on the requisite intent for an offence under section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861
  2. 2 Whether the conviction under section 18 was safe given the misdirection
  3. 3 Whether there was sufficient evidence of intent to cause grievous bodily harm

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction under section 18 was unsafe due to a clear and accepted misdirection to the jury regarding the requisite intent, and insufficient evidence to prove intent to cause really serious bodily injury beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction under section 18 quashed; conviction under section 20 substituted; sentence imposed

Orders

  • Conviction under section 18 quashed
  • Conviction under section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 substituted