Smith, R v
MRS JUSTICE CARR: 1 Following his earlier guilty pleas, the appellant was sentenced on 30 July 2019 in Nottingham Crown Court to a total sentence of 10 years' imprisonment on three offences of sexual activity with a child family member and two offences of inciting a child family member to engage in sexual activity. 2 The provisions of the Sexual...
3 min de lecture · 458 mots
MRS JUSTICE CARR: 1 Following his earlier guilty pleas, the appellant was sentenced on 30 July 2019 in Nottingham Crown Court to a total sentence of 10 years' imprisonment on three offences of sexual activity with a child family member and two offences of inciting a child family member to engage in sexual activity. 2 The provisions of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply to this offence. Where a sexual offence has been committed against a person, no matter relating to that person shall during that person's lifetime be included in any publication if it is likely to lead members of the public to identify that person as the victim of that offence. This prohibition applies unless waived or lifted in accordance with s.3 of the Act. 3 This is the appellant's appeal against sentence with limited leave: the matter is before us for the sole purpose of clarifying the sentence methodology. At the conclusion of his sentencing remarks, the Judge stated that looking at the totality of the case, had the appellant been convicted after a trial, the total sentence would have been 15 years' imprisonment made up of 10 years on the lead offence on Count 5, five years' imprisonment concurrent with each other, but consecutive to the ten years on Counts 1, 2 and 4 and three years' imprisonment concurrent on Count 3. Giving credit for the plea, the sentence was reduced to ten years' imprisonment. The Judge therefore failed to make clear the discount for plea on each of the sentences on each count. 4 The necessary corrections which we make are as follows. Taking each sentence as imposed and applying a full one-third credit for guilty plea, on Counts 1, 2 and 4 the previous sentences will be quashed and reduced to 40 months on each. On Count 3 the previous sentence will be quashed and reduced to 24 months. On Count 5 the previous sentence will be quashed and reduced to one of 80 months. The sentence structure remains the same. Thus, the sentences on Counts 1 to 4 are to run concurrently with each other, but consecutively to the sentence on Count 5. The overall sentence of 10 years' imprisonment stands. __________ OPUS 2 DIGITAL TRANSCRIPTION CERTIFICATE Opus 2 International Limited hereby certifies that the above is an accurate and complete record of the Judgment or part thereof. Transcribed by Opus 2 International Limited Official Court Reporters and Audio Transcribers 5 New Street Square, London, EC4A 3BF Tel: 020 7831 5627 Fax: 020 7831 [email protected] This transcript has been approved by the Judge.
Sources officielles : consulter la page source
Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).
Articles similaires
A propos de cette decision
Décisions similaires
Royaume-Uni
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) – Information Rights
Beacon Counselling Trust v The Information Commissioner & Anor
Introduction to the Appeal 1. On 23 May 2024, the Appellant submitted a request (“the Request”) to the Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) for copies of correspondence making reference to the Appellant, which had been sent to or from a named person at the Trust from 1 February 2023 to the date of the Request. 2....
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Chancery Division)
Kalaivani Jaipal Kirishani v George Major
Sir Anthony Mann : Introduction 1. This is an appeal from an order of HHJ Gerald sitting in the County Court at Central London dated 23rd December 2024 in which he dismissed two of three claims made by Ms Kirishana as claimant against her former cohabitee Mr Major. The claims were for a contribution to household and other domestic expenses,...
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Insolvency and Companies List)
Joanna Rich v JDDR Capital Limited
ICC JUDGE AGNELLO KC: Introduction 1. This is the judgment in relation to an application to set aside a statutory demand against Mrs Joanna Rich (Mrs Rich) and a petition against Mr Clive Rich (Mr Rich) relating to the same debt claimed under a personal guarantee provided by them in relation to a loan granted to LawBit Limited (Lawbit). Mr...