BRD, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 739 (14 June 2024)

The overall sentence imposed was manifestly excessive due to insufficient application of the principle of totality. The sentence for count 2 was quashed and substituted with a lower sentence to ensure the total sentence was just and proportionate.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2024] EWCA Crim 739
Parties: Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: BRD
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 14 June 2024
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome: appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics: Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Voyeurism, Indecent Images, Totality Principle

Criminal Law Sexual Offences Sentencing Voyeurism Indecent Images Totality Principle

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

BRD

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

1 Were the sentences imposed for each count excessive and disproportionate?
2 Did the sentencing judge correctly apply the principle of totality?
3 Should sentences for counts 1, 6, and 7 have been ordered to run consecutively?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

Sentence of 21 months' imprisonment on count 2 quashed and substituted with 11 months' imprisonment
Total sentence reduced from five years to four years and two months' imprisonment

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.