McPeake, R v

McPeake, R v

The appeal against conviction is dismissed because the jury was never put in charge on count 2 and Poole establishes that the procedure followed was valid; the sentence is upheld as appropriate given the seriousness and planning of the offence, and the mitigating factors do not warrant reduction.

Parties
Appellant: Joseph Charles McPeake; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal against conviction dismissed; renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence refused
Legal Topics
Arson, Recklessness, Procedure on Guilty Plea, Sentencing
Criminal Law Arson Recklessness Procedure on Guilty Plea Sentencing

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Charles McPeake

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction was a nullity due to jury procedure on guilty plea
  2. 2 Whether the custodial sentence was excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction is dismissed because the jury was never put in charge on count 2 and Poole establishes that the procedure followed was valid; the sentence is upheld as appropriate given the seriousness and planning of the offence, and the mitigating factors do not warrant reduction.

Court Disposition

appeal against conviction dismissed; renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

Orders

  • Mr Heywood to be paid for legal assistance out of the appropriate fund