Conn, R v [2018] EWCA Crim 1752 (27 April 2018)

Conn, R v [2018] EWCA Crim 1752 (27 April 2018)

The trial judge correctly applied the legal test for admitting evidence of previous false allegations, exercised proper judgment in refusing cross-examination, gave adequate directions on consent and belief in consent, and imposed sentences within the appropriate range given the facts and aggravating features. No arguable grounds for appeal were established.

Citation
[2018] EWCA Crim 1752
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant/defendant: Mervyn Harold Conn
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Indecent Assault, Rape, Cross Examination of Complainant, Previous False Allegations, Sentencing Guidelines, Appeals Procedure
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Indecent Assault Rape Cross Examination of Complainant Previous False Allegations Sentencing Guidelines Appeals Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Mervyn Harold Conn

Applicant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing cross-examination of the complainant about previous allegations of sexual assault against others
  2. 2 Whether the summing-up on consent and belief in consent was adequate
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge correctly applied the legal test for admitting evidence of previous false allegations, exercised proper judgment in refusing cross-examination, gave adequate directions on consent and belief in consent, and imposed sentences within the appropriate range given the facts and aggravating features. No arguable grounds for appeal were established.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.