ES v R

ES v R

Substituting determinate sentences of 10 years and 2 years for the special custodial sentences does not result in the appellant being more severely dealt with, as the total time in custody and on licence under the determinate sentences is not more punitive than the original sentences, even considering differences in early release provisions.

Parties
Appellant: ES; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; sentences varied
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Appeals, Sexual Offences, Early Release Provisions
Criminal Law Sentencing Appeals Sexual Offences Early Release Provisions

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ES

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substituting determinate sentences for special custodial sentences results in the appellant being more severely dealt with contrary to section 11(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 given differing early release provisions.

Ratio Decidendi

Substituting determinate sentences of 10 years and 2 years for the special custodial sentences does not result in the appellant being more severely dealt with, as the total time in custody and on licence under the determinate sentences is not more punitive than the original sentences, even considering differences in early release provisions.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; sentences varied

Orders

  • Special custodial sentences on count 1 and count 2 quashed.
  • Substitute sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment on count 1 (rape).