![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> Crown Prosecution Service Swansea v Gilleeney & Anor [2009] EWCA Crim 193 (17 February 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/193.html Cite as: [2009] EWCA Crim 193, [2009] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 80, [2009] Crim LR 455, [2009] 2 Cr App R (S) 80 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM CARDIFF CROWN COURT
HH JUDGE DAVID MORRIS
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE MADDISON
and
SIR GEOFFREY GRIGSON
____________________
Crown Prosecution Service Swansea |
Appellants |
|
- and - |
||
Karl Gilleeney and Gail Gilleeney |
Respondents |
____________________
Mr Graeme Wilson (instructed by Andrew Keenan & Co)for the Respondents
Hearing date : 15 January 2009
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Pill :
"The court may –
(a) proceed under section 6 before it sentences the defendant for the offence (or any of the offences) concerned, or
(b) postpone proceedings under section 6 for a specified period."
It will be noted that paragraphs (a) and (b) are disjunctive.
"If the court postpones proceedings under section 6 it may proceed to sentence the defendant for the offences (or any of the offences) concerned."
"JUDGE HOPKINS: Is there an application under the Proceeds of Crime Act?
MR MORRIS: There is, your Honour
JUDGE HOPKINS: There will be service by the prosecution upon the court and the defence, I think you told me it was a six month period?
MR MORRIS: Yes, thank you.
JUDGE HOPKINS: With a six month period for it to be done, of a statement setting out what is suggested under The Proceeds of Crime Act, so far as Bethan Jones is concerned.
MR MORRIS: Thank you.
JUDGE HOPKINS: I will not set out any other timetable at the moment. Six months is a long way off. I certainly hope that sentencing can take place well in advance of that."
It is common ground that the direction, whatever its effect, was not confined to Bethan Jones. It is clear that neither Judge Hopkins on 7 November 2006 nor Judge Morris when he sentenced the defendants on 16 May 2007 addressed the question whether Judge Hopkins acted under paragraph (1)(a) or (1)(b) of section 14 of the 2002 Act.