Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Anthony Terence O'Donnell

[2024] EWCA Crim 1115
A big fight broke out at a boxing match. One man was convicted. He appealed, arguing the judge made some mistakes during his trial. The Court of Appeal mostly agreed with the judge, saying the conviction was fair. They did say the judge should have let the jury hear more evidence about how the convicted man wasn’t usually violent, but this wouldn't have changed the result. His sentence also remained the same.

Key Facts

  • February 2020: Violent incident at National Amateur Youth Boxing Championships involving O'Donnell/McDonagh and Doherty families.
  • September 2023: Appellant convicted of violent disorder after trial.
  • July 2024: Appellant sentenced to two years and eight months' imprisonment.
  • Appellant's defense: Attended to protect Brian McDonagh, used reasonable force in self-defense.
  • Prosecution's case: Appellant used unlawful violence against the Dohertys.
  • CCTV footage showed appellant throwing chairs, shouting, and directing others.
  • Incident lasted approximately nine minutes, resulting in injuries and significant damage.
  • Appellant had a previous conviction for fraud.

Legal Principles

Admissibility of bad character evidence of non-defendant.

Criminal Justice Act 2003, section 100(1) and (2)

Admissibility of evidence of good character for a defendant with a previous conviction.

Case law (unspecified, but discussed in the judgment)

Outcomes

Appeal against conviction on grounds 1 and 3 dismissed.

No arguable merit; evidence not crucial to understanding other evidence and did not have substantial probative value. Judge's question was neutral and did not cause unfair prejudice.

Appeal against conviction on ground 2 allowed (partially).

Judge wrongly excluded evidence of appellant's non-violent character from witnesses Blake and Cullum. However, the error did not render the conviction unsafe due to strong evidence against the appellant.

Appeal against sentence dismissed.

Judge's categorization of the offence and sentence were not manifestly excessive considering the appellant's involvement, the seriousness of the violence, and the aggravating factor of being on licence. Mitigation was considered, but the gravity of the offense outweighed it.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.