Regina v Cunningham - Lecture notes 1 PDF

Preview

Summary

Case Brief for Criminal Procedure & Law...

Description

Regina v Cunningham Court of Criminal Appeal, 1957 41 Crim.App. 155, 2 Q.B. 396, 2 All Eng.Rep. 412 Facts: - Parties: o This case takes place in the British system and the definition of what party is which makes zero sense. God save the Queen. - Procedural History: o The appellant was convicted of the crime at the trial court level and they are now appealing to a higher court to reverse the decision. The appellant also tried to get his case thrown out of court for the fact that he did not mean to cause harm to Mrs. Sarah Wade. - Basis of Argument: o The appellant believes that the Judge at the lower level incorrectly defined the act of malicious intent to the jury. They feel that due to this fact, the conviction should be overturned. The Appellant has been convicted because he stole a gas meter that led to a leak in Mrs. Sarah Wade’s house that partially made her choke. Issue: - The act of the appellant was clearly unlawful, the court must decide whether or not this act was malicious or not. Summary of Arguments: - The prosecution believes that the judge incorrectly used the term “wicked” when defining what a malicious act was. They believe that their act, though horrible, was not intentional and therefore wicked should not have been used. Holding: - The court overturned the conviction Court’s Reasoning: - According to a principle from Professor C.S. Kenny in the first edition of Outlines of Criminal Law, he stated that in any statutory definition of a crime, malice must not be defined as wicked. It is the opinion of the court that the trial court judge was incorrect told the jury to consider a wicked act, a malicious one. The court believes that the jury solely should have the power to consider this act malicious or not....