Court of Appeal Queen’s Bench Division
Regina v Robinson (Anthony)
Regina (Robinson) v Independent Adjudicator
[2017] EWCA Crim 936
2017 June 14
Sir Brian Leveson P, Haddon-Cave J, Judge Inman QC
CrimeDouble jeopardyAutrefois convictDefendant charged with escape from lawful custody after absconding from prisonDefendant also charged by prison authorities with disciplinary charge of absconding from prisonIndependent adjudicator sentencing defendant to 14 days’ imprisonment on disciplinary chargeDefendant subsequently sentenced to three months’ imprisonment on criminal chargeWhether decision of independent adjudicator in excess of jurisdiction Prison Rules 1999 (SI 1999/728), r 51

The defendant absconded from prison while serving a term of 40 months’ imprisonment for burglary. He was arrested and charged with escape from lawful custody before being returned to prison, where he was charged with an offence against discipline, namely absconding from prison, contrary to rule 51 of the Prison Rules 1999. The defendant pleaded guilty to the disciplinary charge without informing the independent adjudicator that he had been charged with a criminal offence, and was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment to run consecutive to the sentence of imprisonment he was already serving. Subsequently he appeared in the Crown Court on the charge of escape from lawful custody. His representative advised him that no issue of autrefois convict arose, having in mind a Court of Appeal decision to the effect that an adjudicator dealing with an offence of prison discipline was not a court of competent jurisdiction. Accordingly the defendant pleaded guilty. Unaware of the sentence that had been imposed by the independent adjudicator, the recorder sentenced the defendant to three months’ imprisonment, consecutive to his current sentence. The defendant applied for permission to appeal against conviction on the grounds that he had been sentenced twice for the same offence.

On the application—

Held, permission to appeal granted. The adjudication and conviction could not both stand. The decision of the independent adjudicator was, through no fault of his own, not merely voidable, but so wrong in law as to be outside or in excess of jurisdiction and void ab initio: he had acted without having jurisdiction over the cause and had exercised his powers in a procedural manner that involved a gross and obvious irregularity. The sound policy reasons for this were that prisoner adjudications should not be allowed to prevent or disable the Crown Court from proceeding to exercise its proper jurisdiction in relation to the criminal law. The independent adjudicator had erred fundamentally in proceeding with the adjudication when criminal proceedings were extant. The court would grant permission to appeal, reconvene itself as the Administrative Court of the Queen’s Bench Division, abridge time, dispense with procedural formalities and allow the claim for judicial review of the decision of the independent adjudicator and sentence of an additional 14 days, to remedy the material error and rectify the decision which was void (paras 18–23).

Webster v Lord Chancellor [2016] QB 676, CA applied.

Per curiam. Where a prison adjudication proceeding involves punishment by loss of liberty such proceedings amount to “criminal proceedings” by a body of competent jurisdiction and the rule against double jeopardy applies (para 23).

R v Hogan [1960] 2 QB 513, CA not followed.

Steven Powles (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.

Benjamin Douglas-Jones (instructed by Crown Prosecution Service, Special Crime Division, Appeals Unit) for the Crown.

Georgina Orde, Barrister

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies