Bishop, R v [2018] EWCA Crim 2146 (17 July 2018)

Bishop, R v [2018] EWCA Crim 2146 (17 July 2018)

The original sentence of four months' imprisonment was unduly lenient as it failed to properly apply the sentencing guidelines, did not account for aggravating factors, and inappropriately treated the domestic context as mitigating. The appropriate sentence was 21 months' imprisonment, suspended for 24 months, reflecting the correct categorisation under the guidelines and the balance of aggravating and mitigating factors.

Citation
[2018] EWCA Crim 2146
Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Offender/respondent: Christopher Bishop
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Attorney General's Reference (criminal) / Appeal Against Sentence Under Section 36 Criminal Justice Act 1988
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence increased and suspended
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Assault by Penetration, Domestic Violence, Sexual Offences, Sentencing Guidelines
Criminal Law Sentencing Assault by Penetration Domestic Violence Sexual Offences Sentencing Guidelines

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

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Christopher Bishop

Offender/respondent

Procedural Posture

Attorney General's Reference (criminal) / Appeal Against Sentence Under Section 36 Criminal Justice Act 1988

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for assault by penetration was unduly lenient
  2. 2 Proper categorisation of the offence under sentencing guidelines
  3. 3 Appropriate application of aggravating and mitigating factors

Ratio Decidendi

The original sentence of four months' imprisonment was unduly lenient as it failed to properly apply the sentencing guidelines, did not account for aggravating factors, and inappropriately treated the domestic context as mitigating. The appropriate sentence was 21 months' imprisonment, suspended for 24 months, reflecting the correct categorisation under the guidelines and the balance of aggravating and mitigating factors.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence increased and suspended

Orders

  • Original sentence of four months' imprisonment quashed
  • Substituted sentence of 21 months' imprisonment, suspended for 24 months