Lanning & Anor v R.

Lanning & Anor v R.

The trial judge correctly admitted bad character evidence as relevant to the issue of whether the stabbing was deliberate and to counter character attacks. There was insufficient factual basis to leave overwhelming supervening act to the jury for Camille. The indictment was not defective for omitting lesser offences. The appeals against conviction are dismissed.

Parties
1st Appellant: Alex Christopher Lanning; 2nd Appellant: Jonathan Roy Camille; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeals against conviction dismissed
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Joint Enterprise, Overwhelming Supervening Act, Manslaughter, Murder, Indictment Amendment
Criminal Law Bad Character Evidence Joint Enterprise Overwhelming Supervening Act Manslaughter Murder Indictment Amendment

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alex Christopher Lanning

1st Appellant

Jonathan Roy Camille

2nd Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting bad character evidence against Alex Lanning
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in not leaving the issue of overwhelming supervening act to the jury for Jonathan Camille
  3. 3 Whether the indictment was defective for not including lesser offences such as affray or assault occasioning actual bodily harm

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge correctly admitted bad character evidence as relevant to the issue of whether the stabbing was deliberate and to counter character attacks. There was insufficient factual basis to leave overwhelming supervening act to the jury for Camille. The indictment was not defective for omitting lesser offences. The appeals against conviction are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction dismissed

Orders

  • Convictions and sentences affirmed
  • No amendment to indictment