Smith, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 361 (14 March 2024)
The sentencing judge's refusal to adjourn for further psychiatric assessment was reasonable given the significant improvement in the appellant's mental health, the extensive prior assessments, and the absence of current evidence requiring a hospital order. The finding of high retained culpability was justified by the appellant's planning and conduct. The sentence was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.
- Citation
- [2024] EWCA Crim 361
- Parties
- Respondent: Rex; Appellant: Moses Smith
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 14 March 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Diminished Responsibility, Hospital Orders, Dangerous Offender Provisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Respondent
Moses Smith
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in refusing to adjourn for further psychiatric assessment under the Mental Health Act 1983
- 2 Whether the judge was wrong to find high retained culpability under the Manslaughter Sentencing Guideline
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge's refusal to adjourn for further psychiatric assessment was reasonable given the significant improvement in the appellant's mental health, the extensive prior assessments, and the absence of current evidence requiring a hospital order. The finding of high retained culpability was justified by the appellant's planning and conduct. The sentence was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
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