R v Bowman & Anor
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE FULFORD
- MRS JUSTICE SIMLER DBE
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Michael Bowman and Mark Lennon were convicted of firearm-related offenses and appealed their convictions on the grounds that the judge wrongly admitted evidence of their previous convictions to show propensity. The court held that the judge did not err in admitting the previous convictions, emphasizing the relevance and fair application of the evidence under Section 101(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The law was deemed correctly applied, and the appeals were dismissed.
Judgment
Lord Justice Fulford :
Introduction
On 20 December 2012 in the Crown Court at Leeds before His Honour Judge Collier Q.C., The Recorder of Leeds, and a jury the appellants, Michael Scott Bowman (aged 45) and Mark Anthony Lennon (aged 41) were convicted of possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life (count 2), possessing ammunition without a firearms certificate (count 3) and possessing a prohibited firearm (count 4), and on 21 December 2012 they were sentenced to 16 years’ imprisonment on count 3, 4 years’ imprisonment concurrent on count 3 and 8 years’ imprisonment, again to be served concurrently, on count 4 making a total of 16 years’ imprisonment.
On count 1 (attempted murder) the jury acquitted Bowman and Lennon was acquitted on the judge’s direction following a submission of no case to answer.
Before this court they appeal against their convictions by leave of the single judge.
The Issue on the Appeal
The single but important issue raised on this appeal is whether the judge erred in admitting evidence of the bad character of the appellants, by way of certain previous convictions, as evidence of propensity. The evidence was said to be relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution under section 101 (1)(d) Criminal Justice Act 2003 (“CJA”).
The relevant statutory material
The relevant statutory provisions are contained in sections 101 and 103 of the CJA. Section 101 provides:
“(1) In criminal proceedings evidence of the defendant's bad character is admissible if, but only if –
[…]
(d) it is relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution.
[…]
(g) the defendant has made an attack on another person’s character.
[…]
(3) The court must not admit evidence under subsection (1)(d) or (g) if, on an application by the defendant to exclude it, it appears to the court that the admission of the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the court ought not to admit it.
Section 103 of the 2003 Act provides :
(1) For the purposes of section 101(1)(d) the matters in issue between the defendant and the prosecution include -
(a) the question whether the defendant has a propensity to commit offences of the kind with which he is charged, except where his having such a propensity makes it no more likely that he is guilty of the offence;
[...]
(2) Where subsection (1)(a) applies, a defendant's propensity to commit offe