Rheines v R.

Rheines v R.

The court martial was entitled to take into account the appellant's persistent dishonesty and involvement of innocent civilians in his defence, as this conduct bore directly on his fitness to hold rank. The sentence of reduction in rank was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive given the disciplinary context and the need to uphold military discipline.

Parties
Appellant: Robert Rheines; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court Martial Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Standing Orders, Sentencing, Reduction in Rank, Disciplinary Proceedings, Road Traffic Offences
Military Law Criminal Law Breach of Standing Orders Sentencing Reduction in Rank Disciplinary Proceedings Road Traffic Offences

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

Parties

Robert Rheines

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court Martial Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of reduction in rank was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the court martial was entitled to consider the appellant's conduct after the offence in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The court martial was entitled to take into account the appellant's persistent dishonesty and involvement of innocent civilians in his defence, as this conduct bore directly on his fitness to hold rank. The sentence of reduction in rank was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive given the disciplinary context and the need to uphold military discipline.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed