Regina v Hare, Regina v Sullivan: CACD 9 Dec 2004

The defendants appealed their convictions, saying that counsel had been inhibited by the judge from presenting their cases properly.
Held: The judge had shown a distinct lack of courtesy to the counsel representing one defendant, without any fault on counsel’s part. Counsel had been prevented from putting relevant evidence before the jury, and the judge’s behaviour damaged the client’s confidence in the trial process. The convictions were quashed but a retrial was ordered.


Judge LJ, Dobbs J, Sir Michael Wright


Times 16-Dec-2004


England and Wales


CitedRegina v Sullivan; Regina v Gibbs; Regina v Elener; Regina v Elener CACD 8-Jul-2004
The appellants, each convicted of murder, challenged the minimum periods of detention ordered to be served.
Held: As to the starting point for sentencing, judges should have regard to the published practice directions, and not the letter from . .

Cited by:

CitedJones, Regina v CACD 30-Nov-2005
The court considered appeals against tarriffs set for defendants convicted of murder in the light of the schedules to the 2003 Act.
Held: ‘The guidance given by Schedule 21 is provided to assist the judge to determine the appropriate sentence. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.221679