Ding, R v

Ding, R v

The sentence imposed was within the appropriate guidance range for offences involving the use of false documents to evade border control, and there is no general distinction in culpability between the relevant subsections of section 24A. The appeal is dismissed as the sentence was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Heng Pit Ding
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Use of False Documents, Immigration Offences
Criminal Law Immigration Law Sentencing Use of False Documents Immigration Offences

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Heng Pit Ding

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence for securing or seeking to secure the avoidance of enforcement action under section 24A(1)(b) of the Immigration Act 1971 was excessive or wrong in principle
  2. 2 Whether there is a distinction in culpability between offences under section 24A(1)(a) and 24A(1)(b) of the Immigration Act 1971
  3. 3 Whether offences under section 25 of the Identity Cards Act 2006 are generically more serious than those under section 24A(1) of the Immigration Act 1971

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence imposed was within the appropriate guidance range for offences involving the use of false documents to evade border control, and there is no general distinction in culpability between the relevant subsections of section 24A. The appeal is dismissed as the sentence was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed