The appellant was a 40-year old male with 30 convictions for 94 offences. On the day in question, he had an argument with his partner with whom he lived in a block of flats. After she left their flat, he shouted abuse at her. A neighbour asked him to be quiet and to control his language. The appellant told his neighbour to ‘Fuck off’ and to ‘come inside and make me’ in response to a request to control his behaviour. The appellant also threatened to cause damage to the neighbour’s car. The police were informed of these events. At about 9 pm the same day, three police officers arrived at the appellant’s address. They arrested him for an offence of threatening to cause criminal damage. The appellant was initially taken to a hospital after he reported that his leg was infected and that he was suffering from coronavirus. During the journey, he became agitated in the back of a police van. In response to one of the officer’s attempts to calm him down, he indicated that he would whack the officer and that he was ‘going to get my spit all over you’. On arrival at the hospital he told the same officer that he hoped that all of his family would be infected with coronavirus. The appellant was discharged from the hospital without being treated due to his aggressive and threatening behaviour towards medical staff. As he was being taken back to the police van he collected phlegm in his mouth and made to spit at two of the police officers. While they applied a spit hood he made further threats to spit at them. Although the hood was removed at the police station, another had to be applied after the appellant once again threatened to spit at officers. At his trial in the Leicester Crown Court, the appellant pleaded guilty to three counts of assault on an emergency worker, as well as to an offence of using threatening words or behaviour contrary to s 4 of the Public Order Act 1986. In respect of the assault offences, he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment on each count. In respect of one of the counts, the sentence was ordered to run consecutively rather than concurrently. In the case of the s 4 offence, the judge imposed a two months’ prison sentence which was ordered to run concurrently. The total sentence imposed was therefore 12 months’ imprisonment. The appellant appealed against his sentence on two grounds: (i) that the sentence of eight months’ imprisonment for the assault offence (it had been reduced to six months to reflect the guilty plea) was excessive given the appellant’s ‘chaotic lifestyle’ and the fact that no spitting had actually occurred; and (ii) that there had been no proper basis on which to order that the sentence for one of the assault counts was to run consecutively rather than concurrently with the sentences for the other assault counts.

中文翻译：

---

连续还是并发？多项罪名的适当量刑：R v Brown [2020] EWCA Crim 1095

上诉人是一名 40 岁男性，因 94 项罪行被定罪 30 人。当天，他与住在公寓楼里的伴侣发生了争执。在她离开他们的公寓后，他辱骂她。一位邻居让他保持安静并控制自己的语言。上诉人告诉他的邻居“滚开”和“进来让我”，以回应控制他行为的要求。上诉人还威胁要损坏邻居的汽车。警方获悉这些事件。同日晚上九时左右，三名警员抵达上诉人住址。他们以威胁造成刑事损害的罪名逮捕了他。上诉人在报告他的腿被感染并且患有冠状病毒后最初被送往医院。在旅途中，他在一辆警车的后座上变得焦躁不安。在回应一名警官试图让他冷静下来时，他表示他会殴打这名警官，并且“要让我的口水喷到你身上”。到达医院后，他告诉同一位官员，他希望他的家人都感染了冠状病毒。上诉人因对医务人员具有攻击性和威胁性，未经治疗即出院。当他被带回警车时，他嘴里含着痰，还被逼向两名警察吐口水。当他们戴上吐口水罩时，他进一步威胁要向他们吐口水。尽管在警察局取下了引擎盖，但在上诉人再次威胁要向警察吐口水后，不得不重新使用引擎盖。在莱斯特刑事法庭的审判中，上诉人承认三项袭击急救人员的罪名，以及违反 1986 年《公共秩序法》第 4 条的使用威胁性言语或行为的罪行。就袭击罪行，他被判处六个月徒刑'每项罪名都被监禁。对于其中一项罪名，该判决被命令连续执行而不是同时执行。在第 4 项罪行的情况下，法官判处两个月监禁，并被命令同时执行。因此，判处的总刑期为 12 个月监禁。上诉人对他的判决提出上诉，理由有两个：(i) 鉴于上诉人“混乱的生活方式”以及实际上并未发生随地吐痰的事实，对殴打罪判处的八个月监禁（已减至六个月以反映认罪）是过分的；(ii) 没有适当的依据可以下令对一项袭击罪名的判决连续执行，而不是与其他袭击罪名的判决同时执行。