R v Field
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 10 December 1992 |
| Date | 10 December 1992 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Russell, Mr Justice Blofeld and Mr Justice Latham
Crime - grievous bodily harm - offence unknown to law
Where a defendant was charged with causing grievous bodily harm with intent, contrary to section 18 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861, it was not open to the jury to acquit him of that offence and convict him of causing grievous bodily harm, an offence not known to the law.
The Court of Appeal so stated when giving reasons for allowing, on December 7, the appeal of Andrew John Field against his conviction on March 31, 1992 at Inner London Crown Court (Judge Pryor, QC and a jury) of causing grievous bodily harm.
Mr Graham Cooke, who did not appear below, assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals, for the appellant; Mr W N McKinnon for the Crown.
LORD JUSTICE RUSSELL, giving the judgment of the court, said that the judge had directed the jury that there were three possible verdicts: (i) guilty as charged, of causing grievous bodily harm with intent; (ii) not guilty as charged, but guilty of causing grievous bodily harm; (iii) not guilty.
That left for the jury's consideration an offence unknown to the law, namely causing grievous bodily harm.
The jury thereupon acquitted the appellant of the offence charged and purported to return a verdict which was not open to them.
The indictment contained only one count and did not contain particulars of the manner in which the harm had allegedly been caused.
Their Lordships took the view...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Samtoch Mandair
... ... The appeal came on before another Division of this court on 18 February 1993. Nolan LJ, giving the judgment of the court, set out the history of the matter and said: "…. a closer examination of the legal issues in the light of the decision of this court in the case of R v Field which was delivered on 10 December 1992, has produced a further and simpler ground of appeal which we gave the appellant leave to add at the beginning of the hearing before us. It relates to the form of the indictment and to the terms in which the verdict of the jury was delivered." ... ...
-
R v BR (Sentencing: Extended Licences
...20 EHRR 247. The criteria for determining whether an order is a penalty, distilled from that case, were set out by this court in R v Field and Young [2002] EWCA Crim 2913. i) The starting point is whether the measure is imposed following a criminal conviction (see paragraphs 28 and 29 of th......
-
R (R) v Durham Constabulary and Another
...(McCann) v Crown Court at Manchester [2002] UKHL 39, [2003] 1 AC 787, paras 28-34, 72, 77, 109-111, 116, 117), disqualification orders ( R v Field [2002] EWCA Crim 2913, [2003] 1 WLR 882, para 58), and parenting orders ( R (M) v Inner London Crown Court [2003] EWHC 301 Admin, [2003] 1 ......
-
R v Lahaye (Dean John)
...1 AC 208 has deprived a number of earlier decisions, such as R v Springfield (1969) 83 Cr App R 608, R v McCready [1978] 1 WLR 1376 and R v Field (1997) 97 Cr App R 357, of any continuing authority in this area. In summary, section 6(3) of the 1967 Act enables a defendant to be convicted of......