Barratt, R. v

Barratt, R. v

Section 1(4) of the Prison Security Act 1992 does not require a specific instruction to submit to lawful authority; the appellant had a reasonable opportunity to submit during the mutiny and failed to do so without reasonable excuse, justifying conviction and sentence.

Parties
Appellant: Aaron Barratt; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Prison Mutiny, Sentencing, Interpretation of Statutory Provisions
Criminal Law Prison Mutiny Sentencing Interpretation of Statutory Provisions

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aaron Barratt

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 1(4) of the Prison Security Act 1992 requires a specific instruction to submit to lawful authority during a mutiny
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had a reasonable opportunity to submit to lawful authority during the mutiny
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

Section 1(4) of the Prison Security Act 1992 does not require a specific instruction to submit to lawful authority; the appellant had a reasonable opportunity to submit during the mutiny and failed to do so without reasonable excuse, justifying conviction and sentence.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • conviction upheld
  • sentence upheld