R v Burgess [1991] 2 QB 92 is a decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales

Court of Appeal of England and Wales

The Court of Appeal of England and Wales is the second most senior court in the English legal system, with only the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom above it...

 that found sleepwalking

Sleepwalking

Sleepwalking, also known as somnambulism, is a sleep disorder belonging to the parasomnia family. Sleepwalkers arise from the slow wave sleep stage in a state of low consciousness and perform activities that are usually performed during a state of full consciousness...

 as insane automatism

Automatism (law)

-Definition:Automatism is a rarely used criminal defence. It is one of the mental condition defences that relate to the mental state of the defendant. Automatism can be seen variously as lack of voluntariness, lack of culpability or excuse...

. In a previous decision, Burgess was found not guilty by reason of insanity because his case fell under the M'Naghten Rules

M'Naghten Rules

The M'Naghten rules were a reaction to the acquittal of Daniel McNaughton. They arise from the attempted assassination of the British Prime Minister, Robert Peel, in 1843 by Daniel M'Naghten. In fact, M'Naghten fired a pistol at the back of Peel's secretary, Edward Drummond, who died five days later...

. Burgess appealed his previous verdict on the grounds he was not guilty due to non-insane automatism because he did not have the mens rea

Mens rea

Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...

to make him guilty. However, the court ruled that sleepwalking was considered insane automatism and Burgess' appeal was denied.

Facts

On June 2, 1988, Mr. Barry Burgess attacked his friend Miss Katrina Curtis. She had fallen asleep on a sofa and woke up when Burgess, while allegedly sleepwalking, hit her over the head with a bottle. He subsequently picked up a video tape recorder and hit her on the head with it, giving her cuts and bruises. He put his hands around her throat, and when she said, "I love you Bar," it appeared that he came to his senses, and he called for an ambulance.

Judgement

On July 20, 1989, the Bristol Crown Court before Judge Sir Ian Lewis and a jury found Burgess not guilty by reason of insanity on a charge of wounding with intent. He was ordered to be detained at a psychiatric hospital. Under section 12 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968, Burgess appealed the decision.

Appeal

The defendant brought in psychiatrist Dr. d’Orban and neuropsychiatrist Dr. Eames for medical evidence, and the prosecution called in neuropsychiatrist Dr. Fenwick. Dr. Fenwick contended that the incident was not sleepwalking, but perhaps a hysterical dissociative state.

The judge, Lord Lane said, "We accept of course that sleep is a normal condition, but the evidence in the instant case indicates that sleep walking, and particularly violence in sleep, is not normal."

It was found that the violent action was due to an internal, organic one, rather than an external cause. Thus, the appeal was subsequently denied.

Implications

This case set the legal status of committing violence while sleepwalking a form of insanity.