R v Frank Ronald Agate

R v Frank Ronald Agate

The application for permission to appeal was refused because the sentence was not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle, the applicant's health was properly considered, and there was no medical evidence justifying further mitigation. The appeal was totally without merit, warranting a loss of 28 days' credit for time served.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: Frank Ronald Agate
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
application for permission to appeal refused as totally without merit
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Sexual Offences, Dangerousness, Appeals
Criminal Law Sentencing Sexual Offences Dangerousness 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Frank Ronald Agate

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or wrong in principle
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's ill health justified a reduction in sentence or a suspended sentence

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal was refused because the sentence was not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle, the applicant's health was properly considered, and there was no medical evidence justifying further mitigation. The appeal was totally without merit, warranting a loss of 28 days' credit for time served.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal refused as totally without merit

Orders

  • 28 days of time in custody pending appeal not to be reckoned as part of sentence under section 29(1) Criminal Appeal Act 1968