S, R. v

S, R. v

The judge correctly exercised discretion in refusing a stay as no serious prejudice was established; the caution was admissible as bad character evidence under statute; a fair trial was possible.

Parties
Appellant: Stephen Paul S; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Indecent Assault, Abuse of Process, Delay, Bad Character Evidence
Criminal Law Rape Indecent Assault Abuse of Process Delay Bad Character Evidence

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

Parties

Stephen Paul S

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial should have been stayed due to delay and potential prejudice to the defence
  2. 2 Whether the admission of bad character evidence (caution) was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The judge correctly exercised discretion in refusing a stay as no serious prejudice was established; the caution was admissible as bad character evidence under statute; a fair trial was possible.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Sentences of 4 years for indecent assault quashed and substituted with 2 years each, concurrent with rape sentence
  • Conviction upheld