IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
BETWEEN
R RESPONDENT
v
White APPELLANT
SKELETON ARGUMENT OF THE APPELLANT
GROUNDS OF APPEAL
1. The learned judge misdirected the jury in terms of the circumstances when the duty to
take reasonable steps to correct a dangerous situation arises. There are no parallels
between R v Evans [2009] 1 WLR 1999 and the present case.
2. The appellant did not supply the drugs which the deceased took on his own volition, so
he had not created a state of affairs which gave rise to a nexus creating a duty under a
dangerous situation to act, R v Miller [1983] 2 AC 161.
3. R v Kuddus [2019] EWCA Crim 837 at paragraph 36:
