Mickevicius & Ors v R [2012] EWCA Crim 1477 (06 July 2012)

Mickevicius & Ors v R [2012] EWCA Crim 1477 (06 July 2012)

The convictions for rape (Counts 1 and 2) against all appellants were safe because the only real issue was consent, which the jury must have resolved against the appellants. However, the conviction for anal rape (Count 3) against Bagdziunas was unsafe due to confusion in the directions and the manner in which the verdict was taken. The sentences for Mickevicius and Urbonas were not manifestly excessive, but Bagdziunas's sentence was reduced to reflect the quashing of Count 3.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Crim 1477
Parties
Appellant: Minddaugus Mickevicius; Appellant: Aivaras Urbonas; Appellant: Arturas Bagdziunas; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence After Retrial
Outcome
appeals against conviction on Counts 1 and 2 dismissed; conviction on Count 3 quashed; sentence for Bagdziunas reduced; other sentences upheld
Legal Topics
Rape, Joint Enterprise, Jury Directions, Appeal Against Conviction, Appeal Against Sentence
Criminal Law Rape Joint Enterprise Jury Directions Appeal Against Conviction Appeal Against Sentence

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minddaugus Mickevicius

Appellant

Aivaras Urbonas

Appellant

Arturas Bagdziunas

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence After Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury directions and the manner of taking verdicts rendered the convictions unsafe
  2. 2 Whether the convictions for rape (Counts 1 and 2) and anal rape (Count 3) were safe
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions for rape (Counts 1 and 2) against all appellants were safe because the only real issue was consent, which the jury must have resolved against the appellants. However, the conviction for anal rape (Count 3) against Bagdziunas was unsafe due to confusion in the directions and the manner in which the verdict was taken. The sentences for Mickevicius and Urbonas were not manifestly excessive, but Bagdziunas's sentence was reduced to reflect the quashing of Count 3.

Court Disposition

appeals against conviction on Counts 1 and 2 dismissed; conviction on Count 3 quashed; sentence for Bagdziunas reduced; other sentences upheld

Orders

  • Conviction for anal rape (Count 3) against Bagdziunas quashed
  • Bagdziunas's sentence reduced from 12 years to 11 years concurrent on Counts 1 and 2