A man was sentenced to 16 years in prison for sexually assaulting a boy decades ago. He admitted his guilt, but the judge made a small math mistake in reducing his sentence for pleading guilty. The appeal court fixed the mistake and reduced his sentence slightly to 15 years.
Key Facts
- •Colin Hall pleaded guilty to seven counts of indecent assault on a male person.
- •Offences occurred over a four-year period in the mid-1980s.
- •Initially sentenced to 16 years' imprisonment by Her Honour Judge Sarah Buckingham.
- •Appeal concerned insufficient credit for guilty pleas, alleging an arithmetical error.
- •Appellant was 79 years old at sentencing.
Legal Principles
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 provisions regarding victim anonymity in publications.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
Sentencing guidelines for historical sexual offences.
Sentencing Council guidelines
Appropriate credit for guilty pleas.
R v Paul, Dunn and Roberts [2019] EWCA Crim 476
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The judge's intended discount for the guilty pleas was not correctly applied due to an arithmetical error. The court corrected the sentence to reflect the judge's intention.