R v A.R.B.

[2023] EWCA Crim 775

Case details

Case citations
[2023] EWCA Crim 775
Court
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Judgment date
20 June 2023
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Criminal Criminal appeals Sentencing
Keywords
renewed application for leave to appeal unsafe conviction manifestly excessive sentence extension of time reporting restrictions Contempt of Court Act 1981
Outcome
application for leave to appeal refused (extension of time granted for the sentence application)
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

On a renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction, the relevant question is whether there is an arguable ground that the conviction is unsafe. On a renewed application against sentence, the question is whether there is an arguable ground that the sentence is manifestly excessive. Where neither threshold is met, leave to appeal should be refused.

Factual background

The applicant was convicted at the Crown Court at Luton on offences involving the importation, supply or conspiracy to supply cocaine. He received concurrent sentences, including 17 years’ imprisonment for each of two conspiracies to supply a class A drug. A single judge refused leave to appeal against conviction and sentence on the papers. The applicant renewed both applications and sought an extension of time for the sentence application. The central issues were whether there were arguable grounds that the conviction was unsafe or the sentences manifestly excessive, and whether time should be extended.

Held

  1. Disposition. The court granted the extension of time required for the renewed application concerning sentence. No extension was required for the renewed conviction application. Both applications for leave to appeal were refused.
  2. Conviction. The court considered the detailed written material and the oral submissions. It was satisfied that there were no arguable grounds that the convictions were unsafe. The renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction was therefore refused.
  3. Sentence. The court was also satisfied that there were no arguable grounds that the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive. The renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence was consequently refused.
  4. Reporting restriction. Pursuant to section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, the court ordered that there be no publication of the applicant’s name or of any matter capable of identifying him or his family.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On 20 June 2023, the court granted an extension of time for the sentence application but refused leave to appeal against conviction and sentence: [2023] EWCA Crim 775.
  2. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), single judge: Leave to appeal against conviction and sentence was refused on the papers.
  3. Crown Court at Luton: On 20 May 2022, the applicant was convicted and sentenced for offences involving cocaine.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
application for leave to appeal refused (extension of time granted for the sentence application)

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.