R v Callum Parker

1. MR JUSTICE HILLIARD: On 3 January 2025, in the Crown Court at Lewes, the applicant, then aged 39, pleaded guilty to breach of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order.

2. On 5 February 2025, he was sentenced to eight months' imprisonment.

3. He now renews applications for an extension of time of 14 days and for leave to appeal against sentence after refusal by the single judge.

4. On 23 October 2023, in the Crown Court at Guildford, the applicant was made the subject of a seven-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order following his conviction for sexual assault. The order prohibited the applicant from remaining in the company of any female when it had been indicated that the female did not wish to be in his company, whether indicated by direct speech or otherwise.

5. On 5 December 2024, the applicant, who was drunk, approached a lady in a charity shop in Lancing. He moved his face to within a couple of inches of the lady's face before pulling down his outer trousers. He then began to head towards the rear of the shop where another lady was working behind the till. She felt intimidated and took refuge in a room behind the till. She thought that he was eyeing up a charity box by the till. She rang the police. She described herself as distressed, anxious and concerned about what the applicant might do to her and others. The applicant was arrested on the same day.

6. He had a large number of previous convictions for violence, dishonesty, harassment, public order offences and numerous breaches of court orders. Sentences included community orders and short sentences of imprisonment.

7. There was no pre-sentence report. None was necessary, then or now.

8. When she passed sentence, the judge said that probation services had sought to give the applicant help but he did not take it. She was satisfied that custody was the only option. She said that the offence fell into Category B2 of the applicable sentencing guidelines with a starting point of one year's custody. She gave him full credit for plea, resulting in a sentence of eight months' imprisonment.

9. In his own grounds of appeal, the applicant complained that he was not represented when he entered his guilty plea, that there was insufficient evidence against him, that he was given insufficient credit for his guilty plea and that insufficient regard was had to his health.

10. In refusing leave, the single judge said: "1. You complain about not being represented at the time at which you entered your guilty plea. However, you were represented at the time of sentence. Your lack of representation at the earlier plea hearing is irrelevant to any appeal against sentence.

2. Similarly, you seem to complain about the lack of prosecution evidence. That too is irrelevant. You pleaded guilty. It is then the judge's duty to sentence you on the basis of what you admitted – whatever the state of the evidence.

3. You complain that your poor health was not given consideration. I have seen no evidence of ill health: a judge cannot give weight to something which is not established in evidence and cannot be gleaned from other material before her.

4. Finally, you assert that you were given insufficient credit for your guilty plea. The judge gave you 1/3 credit – that is the maximum available credit. There is nothing in this allegation. I have considered the papers in this case with a view to finding other viable grounds of appeal which you have not highlighted in the paperwork. I can find none. The Judge identified the proper Sentencing Council Definitive Guideline. She placed your offending into the proper category within the Guideline. She adopted the proper starting point. She took a merciful course in making no upwards adjustment from the starting point to reflect your lengthy history of offending. She applied full discount for a guilty plea. The sentence is unimpeachable. Given the lack of merit in your application for leave to appeal, I do not extend time."

11. We cannot improve upon those observations. We agree with them. Accordingly, these renewed applications must be refused. Epiq Europe Ltd hereby certify that the above is an accurate and complete record of the proceedings or part thereof. Lower Ground Floor, 46 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1JE Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Email: [email protected]