Pearson, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1216 (03 October 2024)

Pearson, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1216 (03 October 2024)

The prohibition against entering Morpeth lacked geographical precision and was disproportionate in duration; it should be limited to the parish boundary of Morpeth and reduced from 10 years to 5 years to ensure necessity and proportionality while protecting the victim.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 1216
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Curtis Pearson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Restraining Orders, Proportionality, Appeals
Criminal Law Sentencing Restraining Orders Proportionality Appeals

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Curtis Pearson

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prohibition against entering Morpeth in the restraining order was necessary and proportionate
  2. 2 Whether the geographical ambit of the prohibition was sufficiently precise
  3. 3 Whether the duration of the prohibition was proportionate

Ratio Decidendi

The prohibition against entering Morpeth lacked geographical precision and was disproportionate in duration; it should be limited to the parish boundary of Morpeth and reduced from 10 years to 5 years to ensure necessity and proportionality while protecting the victim.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Paragraph (b) of the restraining order redefined to cover the parish boundary of Morpeth as defined by Northumberland County Council.
  • Duration of prohibition against entering Morpeth reduced from 10 years to 5 years.