HECTOR RILEY v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [1999] ScotHC 167 (24th June, 1999)

HECTOR RILEY v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [1999] ScotHC 167 (24th June, 1999)

The evidence of witness A. was sufficient to corroborate the complainer's evidence of penetration, justifying the conviction for rape. The trial judge erred in considering excessive detail about a previous conviction, but the appropriate sentence remains ten years imprisonment given the gravity of the offence and the appellant's record.

Citation
[1999] ScotHC 167
Parties
Appellant: Hector Riley; Respondent: Her Majesty's Advocate
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction refused; sentence considered de novo and affirmed at ten years imprisonment, backdated to 14 January 1998.
Legal Topics
Rape, Corroboration, Sentencing, Previous Convictions, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Rape Corroboration Sentencing Previous Convictions Appeal Procedure

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

Parties

Hector Riley

Appellant

Her Majesty's Advocate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient corroboration of penetration for a conviction of rape
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in considering detailed circumstances of a previous conviction in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of witness A. was sufficient to corroborate the complainer's evidence of penetration, justifying the conviction for rape. The trial judge erred in considering excessive detail about a previous conviction, but the appropriate sentence remains ten years imprisonment given the gravity of the offence and the appellant's record.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction refused; sentence considered de novo and affirmed at ten years imprisonment, backdated to 14 January 1998.

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction refused
  • Sentence of ten years imprisonment imposed, backdated to 14 January 1998