Henderson, R. v

The applicant's convictions are not unsafe as he entered unequivocal guilty pleas with knowledge of his defence and the facts. The complaints about legal advice and expert evidence do not meet the high threshold for setting aside convictions based on guilty pleas. No sufficient explanation for the delay or justification for further expert examination exists. The application for extension of time and related directions is refused.

Parties: Prosecutor: Regina; Applicant: Paul Henderson (Lance Corporal)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 02 December 2020
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome: applications refused
Legal Topics: Guilty Pleas, Unsafe Convictions, Fresh Evidence, Legal Advice, Sexual Offences, Possession of Indecent Images, Courts Martial Procedure

Criminal Law Military Law Guilty Pleas Unsafe Convictions Fresh Evidence Legal Advice Sexual Offences Possession of Indecent Images +1 more

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Paul Henderson (Lance Corporal)

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to appeal against conviction after pleading guilty
2 Whether the convictions are unsafe due to alleged inadequate legal advice and expert evidence
3 Whether further expert examination of computer evidence is justified

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

applications refused