May, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1782 (19 December 2025)

May, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1782 (19 December 2025)

The seriousness and aggravating features of the applicant's offence—making a prolonged, detailed, and false allegation of rape against three innocent people—required immediate custody. The sentencing judge correctly applied the Sentencing Council guidelines, properly weighed the mitigating and aggravating factors, and was entitled to conclude that appropriate punishment could only be achieved by immediate custody. The impact on the applicant's child and family, while significant, did not amount to the high degree of exceptionality required to suspend the sentence.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Crim 1782
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Chloe Maria May
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
application for leave to appeal against sentence refused
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, False Allegation of Rape, Sentencing, Suspension of Custodial Sentence, Impact on Dependants, Mitigation, Domestic Abuse, Mental Health in Sentencing
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice False Allegation of Rape Sentencing Suspension of Custodial Sentence Impact on Dependants Mitigation Domestic Abuse +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Chloe Maria May

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the custodial sentence for perverting the course of justice should have been suspended due to the applicant's personal circumstances, including impact on her child and family, mental health, and prospects of rehabilitation.

Ratio Decidendi

The seriousness and aggravating features of the applicant's offence—making a prolonged, detailed, and false allegation of rape against three innocent people—required immediate custody. The sentencing judge correctly applied the Sentencing Council guidelines, properly weighed the mitigating and aggravating factors, and was entitled to conclude that appropriate punishment could only be achieved by immediate custody. The impact on the applicant's child and family, while significant, did not amount to the high degree of exceptionality required to suspend the sentence.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal against sentence is refused.