Hall v R [2013] EWCA Crim 82 (08 February 2013)

Hall v R [2013] EWCA Crim 82 (08 February 2013)

Imprisonment of the appellant did not inevitably amount to inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 ECHR, nor did it breach Article 2 ECHR; however, given the exceptional impact of imprisonment on the appellant's health and subsequent deterioration, the sentence should be reduced as an exceptional act of mercy.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Crim 82
Parties
Appellant: Daniel Patrick Roque Hall; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Article 2 ECHR, Article 3 ECHR, Serious Crime Prevention Order, Mitigation Due to Medical Condition

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Patrick Roque Hall

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 Whether imprisonment of a severely disabled offender constitutes inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 ECHR or a breach of Article 2 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive given the appellant's medical condition

Ratio Decidendi

Imprisonment of the appellant did not inevitably amount to inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 ECHR, nor did it breach Article 2 ECHR; however, given the exceptional impact of imprisonment on the appellant's health and subsequent deterioration, the sentence should be reduced as an exceptional act of mercy.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentence reduced to 18 months' imprisonment, representing time served
  • Serious Crime Prevention Order imposed for three years restricting travel and requiring surrender of passports