This week’s Digest considers five judgments, four of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) and one of the Divisional Court. R v A considered the extent to which time spent on remand in local authority accommodation can be taken into account when passing sentence; in R v Smythe, the Court considered an appeal against sentence imposed for offences of causing or allowing physical harm to a child; the issue in
R v Briddle was whether the lack of an intermediary rendered the appellant’s conviction unsafe; the Court in R v Maxwell considered an appeal against sentence imposed for an offence contrary to s. 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861; and, finally, in R (Lyons) v CCRC, the Divisional Court considered whether the CCRC was right to refuse to refer the claimant’s convictions to the Court of Appeal.

R v A [2019] EWCA Crim 106

The judgment, available here, was handed down on 06.02.19 by Mr Justice Sweeney.

The issue in this case was the extent to which time spent on remand in local authority accommodation under s. 91(3) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 could be taken into account when passing sentence in light of the fact that the amended s.242(2)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 referred only to time spent on remand under s. 91(4). The Court held that the only way that such credit could be awarded was for it to be included in the calculation of sentence, there being no power to compel the authorities to give credit for time spent on remand or qualifying curfew under s. 91(3).

 

R v Smythe & Anor [2019] EWCA Crim 90

The judgment, available here, was handed down by Lord Justice Simon on 25.09.18.

The issue in this appeal was whether sentences of 8 years imposed on the appellants for an offence contrary to s. 5 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 were manifestly excessive. The Court allowed the appeal, substituting a sentence of 6 years’ imprisonment, on the basis that the judge had erred in applying sentencing guidelines that were not in force at the time of sentencing and, in addition, the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive in the circumstances.

 

R v Biddle [2019] EWCA Crim 86

The judgment, available here, was handed down by Lady Justice Hallett on 22.02.19.

The issues in this appeal were whether the trial judge had erred in (i) not allowing an intermediary to be present for the benefit of the appellant throughout the whole trial and (ii) giving an adverse inference direction pursuant to s. 35 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 on account of the appellant’s failure to give evidence. The appeal was dismissed; this was not one of the rare cases where an intermediary was required for the whole trial and there was nothing to suggest that there was a causative link between the lack of an intermediary and the decision not to give evidence.

 

R v Maxwell [2019] EWCA Crim 130

The judgment, available here, was handed down by Mr Justice Burbidge on 25.01.19.

The issue in this case was whether a sentence imposed for an offence contrary to s. 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, which had as its starting point a term beyond the guidelines, was manifestly excessive. The court dismissed the appeal; given the circumstances of the case, including the injury caused and other aggravating factors such as the offender being on licence at the time of the offence, the judge had been justified in going beyond the guideline range.

 

R (Lyons) Criminal Cases Review Commission [2019] EWHC 183 (Admin)

The judgment, available here, was handed down by Lady Justice Nicola Davies on 05.02.19.

The claimant challenged the refusal of the Criminal Cases Review Commission to refer two convictions, one for rape and one for sexual assault by penetration, to the Court of Appeal on the basis of new evidence. The challenge failed; the circumstances in which the Divisional Court would intervene in such cases as these were limited and, in this case, there was no clear error in the approach of the Commission which justified such an intervention.

 

Fury over MoJ ‘betrayal’ on legal aid at inquests

 

Nearly 65% of prisoners at women’s jail ‘show signs of brain injury’

 

No-fault divorce to become law 

 

University launches scheme to rehabilitate sex offenders

 

Previous post Weekly Digest: 4 February 2019
Next post UK Anti-Corruption Strategy – one year on