The court considered the practice applicable when seeking to adduce new expert evidence on an appeal against sentence.
Lord Bingham CJ said: ‘Expert witnesses, although inevitably varying in standing and experience, are interchangeable in a way in which factual witnesses are not. It would clearly subvert the trial process if a defendant, convicted at trial, were to be generally free to mount on appeal an expert case which, if sound, could and should have been advanced before the jury. If it is said that the only expert witness in an established field whose opinion supports a certain defence was unavailable to testify at the trial, that may be thought (save in unusual circumstances) to reflect on the acceptability of that opinion.’
Judges:
Lord Bingham CJ
Citations:
[1997] 1 Cr App R 86
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Rogers, Regina v CACD 1-Jul-2016
The court was asked as to as to the circumstances in which s.23 of the 1968 Act applies to fresh evidence or other information which an appellant may seek to adduce before this court on an appeal against sentence.
Held: The rules applicable to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.566429