Hartley, R v

Hartley, R v

The sentencing judge erred by sentencing on the basis of a course of conduct rather than the two offences charged, contrary to R v Canavan. The sentence was therefore quashed and replaced with a lower sentence reflecting only the two offences of conviction.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: John Hartley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence After Conviction at Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence reduced
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Sexual Offences, Indictment Framing, Appeals
Criminal Law Sentencing Sexual Offences Indictment Framing Appeals

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

John Hartley

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence After Conviction at Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred by sentencing on the basis of a course of conduct rather than the two offences charged
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive given the proper basis for sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred by sentencing on the basis of a course of conduct rather than the two offences charged, contrary to R v Canavan. The sentence was therefore quashed and replaced with a lower sentence reflecting only the two offences of conviction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence reduced

Orders

  • Sentence of eight years quashed and replaced with six years' imprisonment on each count
  • Application for defendant's costs order under section 16(4) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 considered