Brain, R. v

The imposition of the CBO was lawful in principle based on post-October 2013 conduct, but certain prohibitions were too broad or duplicated existing criminal law. The sentence of two years' imprisonment for breach of the CBO was not manifestly excessive given the seriousness and persistence of the offending and aggravating features.

Parties: Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Michael Roger Brain
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 10 March 2020
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence and Criminal Behaviour Order
Outcome: Appeal against the imposition of the CBO dismissed in principle; appeal allowed in part to vary and quash certain prohibitions; appeal against the 2019 sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics: Criminal Behaviour Orders, Sentencing, Fraud, Theft, Appeal Procedure

Criminal Law Criminal Behaviour Orders Sentencing Fraud Theft Appeal Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Michael Roger Brain

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence and Criminal Behaviour Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether the imposition, terms, and duration of the Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO) were lawful and appropriate
2 Whether the sentence of two years' imprisonment for breach of the CBO was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal against the imposition of the CBO dismissed in principle; appeal allowed in part to vary and quash certain prohibitions; appeal against the 2019 sentence dismissed.

Orders

Leave to appeal and extension of time granted for the CBO appeal.
Prohibition 1 of the CBO varied to permit use of social networking sites for employment-related purposes.