R v Mark Jarvis
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MRS JUSTICE DOBBS |
| Judgment Date | 04 July 2006 |
| Neutral Citation | [2006] EWCA Crim 1985 |
| Docket Number | No: 200504325/C4 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Date | 04 July 2006 |
[2006] EWCA Crim 1985
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2
Lord Justice Maurice Kay
Mr Justice Crane
Mrs Justice Dobbs Dbe
No: 200504325/C4
MR M MCKONE appeared on behalf of the APPELLANT
MISS H KUBIK appeared on behalf of the CROWN
On 28th August 1998, at the Wolverhampton Crown Court, this 39 year old appellant pleaded guilty on the first day of trial to one count of kidnapping, two counts of robbery and one count of rape. He was sentenced as follows: 10 years' imprisonment for the kidnapping; 5 years' imprisonment for each robbery concurrent to each other and the kidnapping and for the rape, life imprisonment with a minimum of seven-and-a-half years to be served under the provisions of section 2 of the Crime Sentences Act 1997. The total sentence therefore was life imprisonment, with a specified seven-and-a-half year minimum term. On 16th March 1999, the Single Judge refused leave to appeal sentence. The application was renewed before the Full Court, on 2nd July, which refused the application. He appeals against sentence in relation to the rape count only, on reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission under section 9 of the Criminal Appeal act 1995.
The facts are these. At about 6.40 am on 13th January 1998 the complainant, a 26 year old married woman, was waiting at a bus station in Bearwood. The appellant approached her twice and asked when the bus was coming and where it was going. A few minutes later he returned to her again, grabbed the collar of her coat and pushed her into the bus shelter. He said she had to come with him and if she screamed he would cut her throat. He had a hook-shaped object, about two-and-a-half inches long, which later transpired to be a nail clipper. He forced the lady into a van about 100 metres away, took her rings, necklaces and earrings and bracelet. He asked whether she had any credit cards which she showed him and he then went through her purse and handbag.
He drove off, placing the complainant's hand between his legs and took her to three banks and made her use her credit card to obtain a total of £250 which he took. He held on to her tightly by the hand throughout and although she saw other people in the street she was too frightened to call for help.
He took her back to the van where he told her he needed the money because he was a "crackhead". He said that he had just been released and if he was caught he would do a "long stretch" so he may as well take everything she had. He took her to a number of other banks until the cards were declined.
At about 7.20 am he started to ask about her personal life and forced her to kiss him. He undid her blouse and bra, touched her breast and then forced her into the back of the van, telling her to keep her eyes shut. He pulled down her tights and underwear, cut them so her legs were free and raped her. He said he could not be bothered to finish off and got off. He wrapped either her underwear or tights round his fingers and inserted them into the complainant's vagina seemingly in an attempt to remove potential forensic evidence. He told her she could go, but that she must keep her eyes shut. As she walked away he told her not to look back, particularly at the number plate or he would run her over. She went to a nearby shop and the police were summoned.
The appellant was arrested on 14th January. The complainant tights were found in his van. DNA samples were taken.
He was interviewed over a period of three days and denied the offences.
The appellant has a number of previous convictions. The previous convictions between 1981 and 1984 were for mainly driving matters and offences of dishonesty. In 1985 he was convicted of rape, two offences of robbery, taking a child without lawful authority, taking a vehicle without consent, aggravated burglary and attempted robbery. He received a total of 12 years in custody. In 1993 he was convicted of manslaughter for which he received 7 years' imprisonment.
When sentencing, in the light of the appellant's previous convictions, particularly those for rape in 1986 and manslaughter in 1993, and the fact that the present offence had been committed while on licence for the offence of manslaughter, the appellant having been released approximately 10 years prior to the commission of the current offences in October 1997, the judge took the view that a sentence of life imprisonment under the Crime Sentences Act 1997 was appropriate. He found that the appropriate determinate sentence was 14 years. There was a specified period of between 7 years and 9 years and 4 months to be ordered and the period he took was 8 years. He indicated that the lowest it could have been was 7 years, which might have been available if the appellant had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. In the circumstances the judge felt that he had given as much credit as he could. He went on to observe that this appellant had been in custody since 14th January 1998, and subject to licence recall until 19th May 1998 and for all practical purposes had been remanded for the current offences for 6 months. That would be deducted from the specified period of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- R (on the application of Khan) v Secretary of State for Justice
-
Her Majesty's Advocate V. Morris Petch+robert Foye
...R (S) 272, R v Hassall 1999 2 Cr App R (S) 277, R v Bellamy 2001 1 Cr App R (S) 34, R v Smith 2004 2 Cr App R (S) 92 and R v Jarvis 2006 EWCA Crim 1985, and to that list I would add the decision of the Court of Appeal in R v Mills 2004 EWCA Crim 3506. Construction of paragraph (aa) [99] Tur......
-
R (on the application of Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice
...judge may as a matter of discretion fix the tariff at half or two-thirds or somewhere in between: R v Szczerba [2002] 2 Cr App R(S) 86; R v Jarvis [2006] EWCA Crim 1985; R v Rossi [2015] 1 Cr App R(S) Status 228 The first question in these circumstances is whether Mr Stott can claim to hav......
-
R v Manish Shah
...for so doing. It follows that the court did not attempt to circumscribe when exceptional circumstances will arise. 56 In R v Jarvis [2006] EWCA Crim 1985 the appellant pleaded guilty to one count of kidnapping, two counts of robbery and one count of rape. He had a lengthy criminal record w......