Paulius Kriauciunas v R
[2024] EWCA Crim 1142
R v Stephen Kelvin Rule
20 June 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 752
Court of Appeal
A man stole a lot of inheritance money from his family. He got a long prison sentence. He tried to appeal saying the sentence was too harsh, but the appeal court said the judge was fair, considering both the bad things he did and his health problems. The court also said a pre-trial promise from the prosecution wasn't enough to change the sentence.
Key Facts
- •Stephen Kelvin Rule pleaded guilty to two counts of theft from his brother and son.
- •The theft involved proceeds from the sale of a property (£259,500), totaling over £249,000 after fees.
- •Rule misused the inheritance money, initially claiming investment, later admitting to using it.
- •He purchased a property for his wife using some of the stolen funds.
- •Rule's health (stroke in 2023) and potential plea bargain discussions were considered.
- •Full compensation was eventually made after sentencing.
- •He was sentenced to 2 years and 9 months' imprisonment for Count 1 (concurrent 15 months for Count 2).
Legal Principles
Sentencing guidelines for theft, considering factors like amount stolen, breach of trust, planning, and mitigating circumstances (age, health, character).
Sentencing Note; Theft Act 1968, section 1(1)
Appeals against sentence can be based on grounds of manifest excessiveness or being wrong in principle. A prosecution assurance, if given, generally isn't grounds for appeal after a guilty plea.
Case Law (implied)
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The court found the sentence, while stern, was not manifestly excessive. The judge considered mitigating factors but was entitled to impose a higher sentence given the significant aggravating factors (amount stolen, breach of trust, planning). The argument regarding a potential pre-trial prosecution assurance was deemed invalid.