McLean, R v

McLean, R v

The trial judge's refusal to admit Harris's out of court statement was based on a fundamental misapprehension of the law; the judge wrongly believed the historic rule regarding out of court statements remained unmodified, thereby failing to exercise the discretion required by section 114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. As a result, the convictions cannot be considered safe and must be quashed.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Richard McLean; Appellant: Daniel Paine; Appellant: Triston Harris
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
convictions quashed; retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Hearsay, Admissibility of Evidence, Joint Enterprise, Murder, Criminal Justice Act 2003, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
Criminal Law Evidence Hearsay Admissibility of Evidence Joint Enterprise Murder Criminal Justice Act 2003 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Richard McLean

Appellant

Daniel Paine

Appellant

Triston Harris

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to admit hearsay evidence under section 114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the conventional rule regarding out of court statements by one defendant against another remains post-2003 Act
  3. 3 Whether the convictions are safe given the judge's error in law

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's refusal to admit Harris's out of court statement was based on a fundamental misapprehension of the law; the judge wrongly believed the historic rule regarding out of court statements remained unmodified, thereby failing to exercise the discretion required by section 114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. As a result, the convictions cannot be considered safe and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

convictions quashed; retrial ordered

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted to Paine; appeals of all three appellants allowed; convictions quashed.
  • Retrial of all three appellants ordered at the Central Criminal Court or as directed; arraignment within two months unless otherwise directed.