R v AYP
[2024] EWCA Crim 952
R v Nyal Jordan Huskinson
30 November 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1559
Court of Appeal
A man was sent to a hospital after attacking his father. Later, he could have gone to trial, but because of mistakes and delays, the trial never happened, and he remained indefinitely in the hospital. The Court of Appeal said the process was flawed, and ordered a new process be followed, potentially leading to a trial.
Key Facts
- •Nyal Jordan Huskinson was given a hospital order with a restriction order in August 2019 after being found unfit to plead on charges of attempted murder and wounding with intent.
- •The charges stemmed from a serious knife attack on his father.
- •In March 2022, the Secretary of State deemed Huskinson fit to be tried and remitted him to court.
- •Subsequent procedural issues and concerns about Huskinson's mental health led to significant delays and the Crown ultimately offering no evidence.
- •The Crown Court ordered the charges to lie on the file, leaving Huskinson subject to the indeterminate hospital order.
- •Huskinson appealed, arguing that his non-appearance in court prevented the automatic lapse of the hospital order under section 5A(4) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964.
Legal Principles
Hospital order with restriction order under section 5(2) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 (CP(I)A 1964).
CP(I)A 1964
Procedure for remittal of a defendant for trial when deemed fit to plead while subject to a hospital order and restriction order under section 5A(4) of the CP(I)A 1964.
CP(I)A 1964, section 5A(4)
Procedure under Criminal Procedure Rule 25.10 for handling cases where a defendant is remitted for trial after being found unfit to plead.
Criminal Procedure Rule 25.10
Powers of the Court of Appeal on appeal against hospital orders under section 16A and 16B(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968.
Criminal Appeal Act 1968, sections 16A and 16B(1)
Outcomes
Application for extension of time to appeal against the hospital order refused.
The court found no arguable error in the original hospital order and that the applicant's claim was based on procedural irregularities, not the order itself.
Application to restore the charges to the indictment granted.
The court found the Crown Court's decision to let the charges lie on the file while maintaining the hospital order inappropriate, circumventing the proper procedures under section 5A(4) of the CP(I)A and CPR 25.10.
Case remitted to Stafford Crown Court for further directions in accordance with CPR 25.10.
To ensure proper procedure is followed regarding the defendant's attendance and the Crown's decision to offer no evidence.