Taylor, R v [2018] EWCA Crim 2187 (24 July 2018)
The original sentences of twelve months' imprisonment were unduly lenient given the seriousness, repeated nature, and aggravating features of the offences. The appropriate sentence, after measured adjustment for historical maxima and mitigation, was thirty months' imprisonment concurrent on each count.
- Citation
- [2018] EWCA Crim 2187
- Parties
- Prosecution: Regina; Defendant: Frederick Taylor
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 24 July 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal Reference by Attorney General / Sentence Review Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988
- Outcome
- Sentence increased on reference; original sentence quashed.
- Legal Topics
- Indecent Assault, Sentencing, Abuse of Trust, Unduly Lenient Sentences
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Prosecution
Frederick Taylor
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Reference by Attorney General / Sentence Review Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the original sentence imposed for indecent assault was unduly lenient
- 2 Proper categorisation of harm and culpability under modern sentencing guidelines
- 3 Appropriate adjustment for historical offences with lower statutory maxima
Ratio Decidendi
The original sentences of twelve months' imprisonment were unduly lenient given the seriousness, repeated nature, and aggravating features of the offences. The appropriate sentence, after measured adjustment for historical maxima and mitigation, was thirty months' imprisonment concurrent on each count.
Court Disposition
Sentence increased on reference; original sentence quashed.
Orders
- Leave to refer granted.
- Sentence of twelve months' imprisonment on each count quashed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment