Castle Chambers

Jonathan Whitley

Back to Profile of
Jonathan Whitley


Jonathan Whitley

Criminal Appeals

 

Jonathan appears regularly in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) on behalf of Appellants or for the Prosecution in Appeals relating to Conviction and Sentence.

Often he is instructed on Appeal when he did not involved in the case at first instance.

Examples

  • R-v-C (2010) Court of Appeal. Prosecution, responding to Appeal against Sentence. Issue: was Judge entitled to conclude that disruption and diversion of emergency services caused by a serial bomb hoaxer at airport amounted to “a risk of serious harm to the public” and therefore justified the imposition of a Section 41 Restriction to a Hospital Order
  • R-v-G & A (2007) Defence. Court of Appeal. Successful appeal against conviction. Issues: Admissibility of Bad Character and Hearsay evidence where hearsay evidence was determinative of case. Case has been widely cited subsequently.
  • R-v-R (2007) Defence. Court of Appeal. Successful appeal against sentence. Court held that sentencing Judge should have found “exceptional circumstances” to suspend custodial sentence under “old” law: section 118 PCC(S)A 2000. Trade Union treasurer, now aged 67 years, stole £170,000.00 from Union in breach of trust, three year delay between discovery and sentencing.
  • R-v-P (2006) Prosecution. Court of Appeal. Successfully resisted appeal against conviction. Court held that knowledge of content of disc not required for distribution of indecent child images pursuant to section 1 (b) Protection of Children Act 1978 Inadvertent distribution sufficient where appellant had known he had indecent articles in his possession.
  • R-v-H & C(2006) Prosecution. Court of Appeal. Successfully resisted appeal against conviction. Appeal involved absence of identification procedures where presence admitted but participation denied.
  • R-v-Y (2005) Defence. Court of Appeal. Successful appeal against sentence on basis that sentence imposed upon Defendant who pleaded Guilty to theft during aftermath of robbery was insufficiently lower than that imposed on robber.