R v Peter Lindley

R v Peter Lindley

The judge was entitled to conclude that, even if the appellant's account of provocation was true, it did not amount to a significant degree of provocation justifying a reduction in sentence, and thus no Newton hearing was required; the sentence imposed was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Peter Lindley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Attempted Murder, Sentencing, Newton Hearing, Provocation, Extended Determinate Sentence
Criminal Law Attempted Murder Sentencing Newton Hearing Provocation Extended Determinate Sentence

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Peter Lindley

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in refusing a Newton hearing on the issue of provocation by alleged false allegations
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or wrong in principle

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to conclude that, even if the appellant's account of provocation was true, it did not amount to a significant degree of provocation justifying a reduction in sentence, and thus no Newton hearing was required; the sentence imposed was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed