R v Hunter
A defendant with previous convictions or other bad character is not entitled to a good character direction as of right, though the judge has a discretion to give one where the bad character is minor or irrelevant.
Facts
In five appeals, the defendants had complained about the directions given about their good character, or the absence of such directions. Some had no previous convictions but had other evidence of bad character admitted against them, and others had old or minor previous convictions. The Court of Appeal considered the law on good character directions in the light of the bad character provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
Legal principle
Hallett LJ, giving the judgment of the court, said that a defendant who has no previous convictions and against whom no other evidence of bad character has been admitted is entitled to a full good character direction. A defendant with previous convictions, or other bad character, is not entitled to a good character direction, but the judge has a discretion to give a modified direction, which should be exercised only where it would be unjust not to do so, for example where the convictions are old, minor and irrelevant. Judges are not obliged to give a direction which would be misleading to the jury.
Related cases on character evidence
- Director of Public Prosecutions v P [1991] 2 AC 447
- Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales [1894] AC 57
- R v Brewster [2010] EWCA Crim 1194
- R v Hanson [2005] EWCA Crim 824
- R v Highton [2005] EWCA Crim 1985
- R v Vye [1993] 1 WLR 471
- R v Z [2000] 2 AC 483
Studying evidence? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
