Smith, R. v

Smith, R. v

The uncontested expert psychological evidence demonstrates that the appellant's confessions are unreliable, rendering the conviction unsafe.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Shane Stepon Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal After Referral by Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Confession Evidence, Reliability of Confessions, Expert Psychological Evidence, Appeals
Criminal Law Confession Evidence Reliability of Confessions Expert Psychological Evidence Appeals

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Shane Stepon Smith

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal After Referral by Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether new psychological evidence renders the appellant's confession unreliable
  2. 2 Whether the conviction is safe in light of new expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The uncontested expert psychological evidence demonstrates that the appellant's confessions are unreliable, rendering the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

conviction quashed

Orders

  • conviction quashed
  • no retrial ordered