## Facts

- The defendant, Mr. Burgess, injured a woman while allegedly sleepwalking, striking her with a video recorder and a bottle.
- Medical evidence at trial indicated that Mr. Burgess suffered from a sleep disorder, classified as a form of non-insane automatism.
- The trial judge instructed the jury to consider the insanity defense rather than non-insane automatism.
- Mr. Burgess appealed the trial judge’s ruling.

## Issues

1. Whether sleepwalking should be treated as an internal or external cause for the purposes of the automatism defense.
2. Whether the defendant should be entitled to a defense of non-insane automatism or be subject to the insanity defense.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s direction requiring the jury to consider the insanity defense.
- The court found that sleepwalking constitutes an internal condition, aligning it with insanity rather than non-insane automatism.
- The court distinguished between internal causes (such as sleepwalking and epilepsy) and external causes (such as physical blows), citing prior cases including Bratty v Attorney-General for Northern Ireland [1963] AC 386 and R v Quick [1973] QB 910.
- The judgment emphasized that internal factors, being prone to recurrence, require the protections and responsibilities of the insanity verdict.
- The decision resulted in a special verdict of “not guilty by reason of insanity” rather than a full acquittal.

## Legal Principles

- Automatism as a defense requires analysis of whether the involuntary action arose from an internal or external cause.
- Internal causes, such as medical conditions present in the defendant, fall under the insanity defense.
- External causes, such as sudden blows or accidental drug use, may provide a full acquittal through non-insane automatism.
- Sleepwalking is legally categorized as an internal cause, analogous to epilepsy, and thus subject to the insanity defense.
- The insanity defense can lead to court-ordered supervision where public safety is a concern.

## Conclusion

R v Burgess established that sleepwalking is classified as an internal cause requiring the insanity defense, shaping subsequent case law by clarifying the distinction between internal and external causes in automatism and ensuring public safety through appropriate legal responses.


R v Burgess [1991] 2 QB 92