Feld, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 59 (17 January 2024)

Feld, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 59 (17 January 2024)

The sentencing judge correctly applied the statutory and guideline framework for considering mental disorder as mitigation, properly assessed the psychiatric evidence, and was entitled to find that aggravating factors outweighed limited mitigation, making the minimum term of 28 years neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 59
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Erik Feld
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Renewed application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Murder, Mental Disorder, Mitigation, Aggravating Factors, Appeals
Criminal Law Sentencing Murder Mental Disorder Mitigation Aggravating Factors 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Erik Feld

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge properly applied the statutory mitigating feature under paragraph 10(c) of Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Act 2020 regarding mental disorder
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to follow the conclusions of the psychiatric report regarding the impact of the applicant's mental disorder on culpability
  3. 3 Whether the judge's treatment of aggravating factors and the resulting minimum term was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge correctly applied the statutory and guideline framework for considering mental disorder as mitigation, properly assessed the psychiatric evidence, and was entitled to find that aggravating factors outweighed limited mitigation, making the minimum term of 28 years neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

Renewed application for permission to appeal refused