Daniel (Appellant) v The State (Respondent)
There was no evidence of loss of self-control to support provocation; there is no rule of law absolutely excluding self-induced provocation, but provocation does not apply to felony/murder cases. The mandatory death penalty is unconstitutional in this case.
- Citation
- [2014] UKPC 3
- Parties
- Appellant: Richard Anthony Daniel; Respondent: The State
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 13 February 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal to Privy Council
- Outcome
- Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Provocation, Felony/murder Rule, Mandatory Death Penalty, Jury Directions, Partial Defences, Loss of Control
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Richard Anthony Daniel
Appellant
The State
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal to Privy Council
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether provocation should have been left to the jury as a partial defence to murder
- 2 Whether self-induced provocation is excluded as a matter of law
- 3 Whether provocation applies to felony/murder cases under Trinidad and Tobago law
Ratio Decidendi
There was no evidence of loss of self-control to support provocation; there is no rule of law absolutely excluding self-induced provocation, but provocation does not apply to felony/murder cases. The mandatory death penalty is unconstitutional in this case.
Court Disposition
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed.
Orders
- Sentence of death quashed.
- Case remitted to Court of Appeal for imposition of appropriate sentence.
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