Nightingale, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 111 (19 January 2010)

Nightingale, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 111 (19 January 2010)

The sentence was excessive because the aggravating feature of abuse of trust was not sufficiently serious to justify categorisation in the higher sentencing bracket; the appropriate sentence, after considering all factors including delay, was six-and-a-half years.

Citation
[2010] EWCA Crim 111
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Alan Nightingale
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Rape, Sentencing Guidelines, Aggravating Features, Abuse of Trust
Criminal Law Rape Sentencing Guidelines Aggravating Features Abuse of Trust

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Alan Nightingale

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for rape was excessive given the facts and applicable sentencing guidelines.

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence was excessive because the aggravating feature of abuse of trust was not sufficiently serious to justify categorisation in the higher sentencing bracket; the appropriate sentence, after considering all factors including delay, was six-and-a-half years.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentence of eight-and-a-half years quashed
  • Substitute sentence of six-and-a-half years' imprisonment