Harris, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 528 (26 April 2023)
There was insufficient evidence to conclude that the breaches risked very serious harm or distress; therefore, harm should be categorised as category 2, not category 1. The sentence for the first offence was manifestly excessive and should be reduced to reflect the correct harm category and aggravating features.
- Citation
- [2023] EWCA Crim 528
- Parties
- Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Michael John Harris
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 26 April 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Sex Offender Notification Requirements, Breach of Notification Requirements, Appeal Against Sentence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Prosecution
Michael John Harris
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in categorising the harm as category 1 under the Sentencing Guidelines for breach of sex offender notification requirements
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed for the first offence was manifestly excessive
Ratio Decidendi
There was insufficient evidence to conclude that the breaches risked very serious harm or distress; therefore, harm should be categorised as category 2, not category 1. The sentence for the first offence was manifestly excessive and should be reduced to reflect the correct harm category and aggravating features.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part
Orders
- Sentence of 3 years for the first offence quashed and replaced with 2 years and 4 months' imprisonment.
- Sentences for offences 2 to 5 remain unaffected.
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