R v Seyi Odeyemi

R v Seyi Odeyemi

The trial judge did not err in refusing to sever the counts as they were inextricably linked and the risk of prejudice was adequately addressed by judicial directions. The jury directions on intoxication, consent, and adverse inference were proper and in accordance with established legal principles. The sentence imposed was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive given the applicant's risk and the facts of the case.

Parties
Prosecutor: Rex; Applicant: Seyi Odeyemi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Applications for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Renewed applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence refused
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Appeal Against Conviction, Appeal Against Sentence, Severance of Counts, Jury Directions, Dangerous Offender, Sentencing Guidelines
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Appeal Against Conviction Appeal Against Sentence Severance of Counts Jury Directions Dangerous Offender Sentencing Guidelines

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecutor

Seyi Odeyemi

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Applications for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to sever the count of breach of Sexual Risk Order from the indictment
  2. 2 Whether the jury directions on intoxication, consent, and adverse inference from silence were adequate
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or wrong in principle

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge did not err in refusing to sever the counts as they were inextricably linked and the risk of prejudice was adequately addressed by judicial directions. The jury directions on intoxication, consent, and adverse inference were proper and in accordance with established legal principles. The sentence imposed was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive given the applicant's risk and the facts of the case.

Court Disposition

Renewed applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against conviction refused
  • Leave to appeal against sentence refused