William is known for having a calm and approachable manner with his clients whilst also presenting robust, comprehensive, and persuasive advocacy in the courtroom. He has particular experience dealing with young clients and clients suffering from mental illness. Having been instructed in a number of serious and complex youth cases, William is very familiar with telephone and cell site evidence.
He has experience in multiple areas of criminal law and acquired a range of specialist experience before coming to the Bar. Immediately before pupillage, William spent a year working for a boutique law firm in Malaysia, drafting submissions that were instrumental in achieving the exoneration of death row inmates charged with either murder or drug trafficking. Prior to this, he spent 9 months in the USA assisting with the investigation and preparation of capital defence cases. William has also spent a year practising civil law during his time as a County Court Advocate.
William was instructed to represent a client who had pleaded guilty to dwelling burglary and dangerous driving and not-guilty to two counts of attempted burglary. Following representations being made to the CPS, the Crown offered no evidence on the attempted burglary counts. Citing the case of R v Jessemey  EWCA Crim 175, William successfully argued that the Crown Court’s sentencing powers were limited to those of the Magistrates’ Court and he was able to secure an eight-month suspended sentence for his client. Instructed by Thomas Boyd Whyte.
William was instructed to represent a youth client who was charged with conspiracy to supply Class A drugs. Following representations being made to the CPS’ reviewing lawyer regarding the positive NRM referral and the inherent weaknesses of the Crown’s case, the Crown discontinued the charges. Instructed by Paul Martin & Co
William was instructed to represent a youth client who was charged with conspiracy to commit robbery with two others. William drafted a Section 78 PACE argument seeking to exclude the entirety of Crown’s cell-site evidence, which resulted in the Crown discontinuing the proceedings against his client. Instructed by Edwards Duthie Shamash.
William was granted permission to appeal against a sentence made by Portsmouth Crown Court. The appeal concerned the relevance of the factors indicating lesser harm in a case of a burglary where nothing was stolen and the intention was to cause criminal damage. The Court of Appeal also considered the cases of R v Manning and R v Jones in the wake of lockdown measures being lifted. Instructed by Geoff White Solicitors.
William Sneddon represented a defendant, who was accused of making threats to the footballer Mesut Özil and his security staff. Following cross-examination of both complainants over two days, and William’s ‘half-time’ submission of no case to answer, the Court dismissed the case against Mr Ekinci. Instructed by Joseph Hill & Co.