Scott Coley (1) (Appellant) The Queen (Respondent) Colin Mcghee (2) (Appellant) The Queen (Respondent) Darren Harris (3) (Appellant) The Queen (Respondent)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Hughes |
| Judgment Date | 12 March 2013 |
| Neutral Citation | [2013] EWCA Crim 223 |
| Docket Number | >Case No: 201207008D4 (1) 201204187D2 (3),201207008D4, 201106475D4 and 201204187D2 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Date | 12 March 2013 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
4 cases
-
R v Peter McKay
...so, to the defendant, whether or not it was properly given at all. 8 As it transpires, it clearly was not. The authority of R v Coley and Others [2013] EWCA Crim 223, that was certainly referred to in the current Archbold at the time of the trial, makes clear that this particular defence is......
-
Simon Taj v The Crown
...the time, he was not ‘intoxicated’ and so was not deprived of the defence. 20 It was also submitted that R v McGee, R v Harris, R v Coley [2013] EWCA Crim 223 supported the proposition that to be in a state of “voluntarily intoxication” there had to be alcohol or drugs active in the system ......
-
Lee Robert Foye v The Queen
...law of automatism as explained in R v Quick [1973] QB 910, as to which see the recent analysis in this court in R v Caley and others [2013] EWCA Crim 223 at [19]. What Lord Hope was very clearly saying in Ross was that the reverse onus which applies in an insanity or diminished responsibili......
-
Dunnage v Randall
...Corr's capacity was impaired not removed, and the question was the extent to which his autonomy had been overborne. 63 In Coley v R [2013] EWCA Crim 223, the 17 year old defendant was convicted of attempted murder. Having gone to bed he later, in dark clothing, a balaclava, and carrying a k......
2 books & journal articles
-
Political Rhetoric or Principled Reform of Loss of Control? Anglo-Australian Perspectives on the Exclusionary Conduct Model
...‘Recognising Acute Intoxication as DiminishedResponsibility: A Comparative Analysis’ (2012) 76 JCL 71. It is worth noting thatin R vC[2013] EWCA Crim 223 at [16], the court noted that drug abuse is not amental disorder for the purposes of the insanity defence. However, harmful use isidentif......
-
Involuntary Intoxication
...[1843] 10 Cl & F 200 at 210. See DPP vBeard [1920] AC 479, 501; Attorney-General for Northern IrelandvGallagher [1963] AC 349 and RvC[2013] EWCA Crim 223 at [18] (the ‘precise line between the law of voluntaryintoxication and the law of insanity may be difficult to identify in some borderli......