Singh, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 259 (15 February 2024)

The sentencing judge erred by treating unproven allegations in the late-served victim personal statement as aggravating factors and by double counting breach of trust and location. The sentence for the communication offence should have been based on the single message particularised in the indictment. These errors rendered the overall sentence manifestly excessive.

Citation: [2024] EWCA Crim 259
Parties: Respondent: Rex; Appellant: Jaspreet Singh
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 15 February 2024
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome: Appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced
Legal Topics: Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Abuse of Trust, Victim Personal Statement, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors

Criminal Law Sexual Offences Sentencing Abuse of Trust Victim Personal Statement Aggravating and Mitigating Factors

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 4

Parties

Rex

Respondent

Jaspreet Singh

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

1 Whether the sentencing judge erred by treating content of the victim personal statement as an aggravating factor
2 Whether the judge engaged in double counting by treating both breach of trust and location as aggravating factors
3 Whether the judge failed to give adequate weight to mitigation

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced

Orders

Sentence of 30 months on count 2 quashed and substituted with 24 months' imprisonment
Sentence of 6 months on count 7 quashed and substituted with 3 months' imprisonment