Jones, R. v [2002] EWCA Crim 2983 (20 December 2002)

Jones, R. v [2002] EWCA Crim 2983 (20 December 2002)

Prosecuting for indecent assault under s.14 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 after the limitation period for unlawful sexual intercourse under s.6 has expired does not, in itself, constitute an abuse of process. The absence of a limitation period for indecent assault is a deliberate legislative choice, and unless there is prosecutorial misconduct or unfairness beyond the mere selection of charge, a stay is not warranted. The facts of this case do not amount to an affront to justice or misuse of process.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Crim 2983
Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Michael Jones
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Taunton Crown Court
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Sexual Offences, Limitation Periods, Indecent Assault, Unlawful Sexual Intercourse, Sentencing
Criminal Law Abuse of Process Sexual Offences Limitation Periods Indecent Assault Unlawful Sexual Intercourse 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 3 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Michael Jones

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Taunton Crown Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecuting for indecent assault after the limitation period for unlawful sexual intercourse has expired constitutes an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution's conduct deprived the defendant of statutory protection against stale prosecutions
  3. 3 Appropriate sentencing for indecent assault where the underlying conduct is time-barred for unlawful sexual intercourse

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecuting for indecent assault under s.14 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 after the limitation period for unlawful sexual intercourse under s.6 has expired does not, in itself, constitute an abuse of process. The absence of a limitation period for indecent assault is a deliberate legislative choice, and unless there is prosecutorial misconduct or unfairness beyond the mere selection of charge, a stay is not warranted. The facts of this case do not amount to an affront to justice or misuse of process.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal against sentence granted.
  • Sentence on count 4 reduced from 12 months to 9 months' imprisonment, total sentence reduced to 3 years 9 months' imprisonment.