Hoadley, R. v [2021] EWCA Crim 1885 (04 November 2021)

Hoadley, R. v [2021] EWCA Crim 1885 (04 November 2021)

The Court held that the sentencing judge did not err in principle or impose a manifestly excessive sentence. The 26-year minimum term already reflected a substantial discount for mixed motives and personal mitigation, and the aggravating features justified the sentence imposed.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Crim 1885
Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Raymond Hoadley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Minimum Term, Mitigation, Premeditation, Murder for Gain
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Minimum Term Mitigation Premeditation Murder for Gain

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Raymond Hoadley

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in setting the minimum term for murder at 26 years based on classification as murder for gain and aggravating/mitigating factors
  2. 2 Whether the starting point for the minimum term should have been lower due to mixed motives and personal mitigation

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the sentencing judge did not err in principle or impose a manifestly excessive sentence. The 26-year minimum term already reflected a substantial discount for mixed motives and personal mitigation, and the aggravating features justified the sentence imposed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal against sentence is dismissed.