Pepper, R. v
The judge's summing up and interventions did not render Pepper's conviction unsafe; there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to justify Alexander Range's conviction; sentencing starting points for Christopher Range and Hine were too high and should be reduced to reflect proper categorisation of seriousness and mitigation.
- Parties
- Appellant: Marcee Pepper; Appellant: Christopher Range; Appellant: Alexander Range; Appellant: Adam Hine; Respondent: The Crown
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 02 September 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeals against conviction dismissed; appeals against sentence allowed in part.
- Legal Topics
- Conspiracy, Drug Importation, Sentencing, Judicial Directions, Adverse Inference, Circumstantial Evidence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Marcee Pepper
Appellant
Christopher Range
Appellant
Alexander Range
Appellant
Adam Hine
Appellant
The Crown
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge failed to adequately sum up the defence case for Pepper
- 2 Whether excessive judicial intervention rendered Pepper's conviction unsafe
- 3 Whether the judge erred in failing to direct the jury on lifestyle evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The judge's summing up and interventions did not render Pepper's conviction unsafe; there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to justify Alexander Range's conviction; sentencing starting points for Christopher Range and Hine were too high and should be reduced to reflect proper categorisation of seriousness and mitigation.
Court Disposition
Appeals against conviction dismissed; appeals against sentence allowed in part.
Orders
- Pepper's appeal against conviction dismissed.
- Alexander Range's appeal against conviction dismissed.
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