Hudson, R. v

The sentencing judge lacked power to vary the sentence outside the statutory 56-day period; the variation was unlawful and must be quashed, leaving the original sentence to stand.

Parties: Applicant: Christopher Paul Hudson; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 24 March 2011
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome: appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Sentencing, Variation of Sentence, Powers of Court, Time Spent in Custody, Remand, Appeal Procedure

Criminal Law Sentencing Variation of Sentence Powers of Court Time Spent in Custody Remand Appeal Procedure

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 4

Parties

Christopher Paul Hudson

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the sentencing judge had power to vary the sentence imposed after the statutory 56-day period had elapsed
2 Whether the variation of sentence was lawful under section 155 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge lacked power to vary the sentence outside the statutory 56-day period; the variation was unlawful and must be quashed, leaving the original sentence to stand.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

Variation of sentence made in November 2010 quashed
Original sentence of 3 years and 215 days with 49 days to count stands