Daniel (Appellant) v The State (Respondent)

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 36 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Anthony Daniel

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal to Privy Council

  1. 1 Whether provocation should have been left to the jury as a partial defence to murder
  2. 2 Whether self-induced provocation is excluded as a matter of law
  3. 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.