Henderson v Crown Prosecution Service

Henderson v Crown Prosecution Service

Where two charges are properly characterised as alternatives, the Magistrates’ Court should not convict on both; the correct course is to convict on the aggravated offence and adjourn the underlying offence sine die.

Parties
Appellant: James Robert Henderson; Respondent: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrates’ Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions for underlying offences quashed.
Legal Topics
Alternative Charges, Racially Aggravated Offences, Harassment, Double Conviction, Magistrates’ Court Procedure
Criminal Law Procedure Alternative Charges Racially Aggravated Offences Harassment Double Conviction Magistrates’ Court Procedure

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Robert Henderson

Appellant

Crown Prosecution Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal by Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrates’ Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a defendant can be convicted of both an aggravated offence and the underlying offence arising from the same facts
  2. 2 Proper procedure for Magistrates’ Court when dealing with alternative charges

Ratio Decidendi

Where two charges are properly characterised as alternatives, the Magistrates’ Court should not convict on both; the correct course is to convict on the aggravated offence and adjourn the underlying offence sine die.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions for underlying offences quashed.

Orders

  • Convictions on 1 May 2015 for underlying offences quashed.