Simms, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 379 (06 March 2026)
The imposition of the Criminal Behaviour Order was wrong in principle and not justified by the agreed factual basis, which did not establish behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress. The procedural requirements for notice were not met, and the judge's conclusion was unreasonable and inconsistent with the basis of plea.
- Citation
- [2026] EWCA Crim 379
- Parties
- Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Jake Simms
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 06 March 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Ancillary Order (criminal Behaviour Order) After Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Behaviour Order, Ancillary Orders, Drug Offences, Appeal Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Prosecution
Jake Simms
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Ancillary Order (criminal Behaviour Order) After Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the imposition of a Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO) was justified on the agreed factual basis of social supply of drugs
- 2 Whether procedural requirements for notice of CBO application were complied with
- 3 Whether the legal test for making a CBO was met
Ratio Decidendi
The imposition of the Criminal Behaviour Order was wrong in principle and not justified by the agreed factual basis, which did not establish behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress. The procedural requirements for notice were not met, and the judge's conclusion was unreasonable and inconsistent with the basis of plea.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- Criminal Behaviour Order 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