Stephens & Anor, R. v
The judge erred in defining 'significant' as 'more than minimal' rather than its ordinary meaning, but the conviction was safe given the evidence. The minimum term of 20 years for Stephens was not manifestly excessive considering aggravating factors and associated offences.
- Parties
- Respondent: The Queen; Appellant: Jerry Stephens; Appellant: Sandra Mujuru
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 25 May 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeals dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Causing or Allowing Death of a Child, Interpretation of 'significant Risk', Admissibility of Evidence, Minimum Term for Life Sentence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Queen
Respondent
Jerry Stephens
Appellant
Sandra Mujuru
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence from witness interviews of Miss Mujuru
- 2 Correct interpretation of 'significant risk' under s.5(1) Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004
- 3 Whether the minimum term of 20 years for Stephens was manifestly excessive
Ratio Decidendi
The judge erred in defining 'significant' as 'more than minimal' rather than its ordinary meaning, but the conviction was safe given the evidence. The minimum term of 20 years for Stephens was not manifestly excessive considering aggravating factors and associated offences.
Court Disposition
Appeals dismissed
Orders
- Miss Mujuru's conviction upheld
- Stephens' minimum term of 20 years upheld
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