R v Michael James Hudson

R v Michael James Hudson

The sentencing judge correctly applied the relevant principles, referenced statutory maximums and modern guidelines, allowed for mitigation, and structured the sentence to reflect totality; the overall sentence was not disproportionate and the proposed grounds of appeal were not arguable.

Parties
Prosecutor: Rex; Applicant: Michael James Hudson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Totality Principle, Historic Offences, Extension of Time

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

Parties

Rex

Prosecutor

Michael James Hudson

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed breached the principle of totality
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to take proper account of the applicant's age and personal mitigation
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in referencing modern sentencing guidelines for historic offences

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge correctly applied the relevant principles, referenced statutory maximums and modern guidelines, allowed for mitigation, and structured the sentence to reflect totality; the overall sentence was not disproportionate and the proposed grounds of appeal were not arguable.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Extension of time refused
  • Leave to amend grounds refused