Sentencing of a man convicted of sexually assaulting his ex-wife was adjourned last week pending a pre-sentencing report.

The 34-year-old Somerset man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was ordered remanded in custody until June 2 when he will be brought back to court for mention.

A jury found him guilty last month of sexually assaulting his estranged wife.

Crown counsel Vinette Graham-Allen cited a number of precedents before asking for a prison sentence of between 11 and 20 years at yesterday's two hour hearing.

She argued that the law made no distinction as to whether or not the victim was known to the defendant and told the court that there were no mitigating factors, but that physical violence, an aggravating factor, had taken place.

And a previous conviction of unlawful carnal knowledge should be taken into account, she said.

But defence lawyer Mark Pettingill, in his submission, said the man, who has two young children from the marriage, was not a threat to society.

"(He) is not a person who belongs in prison," he said. "He is not a threat to the like minded members of this country. He is not an individual that the court has to be concerned about potentially committing further offences of like nature."

He pointed out that he had been acquitted of using a weapon or threatening to use one during the assault.

"He came before the court and gave full and free evidence. The jury acquitted him of those aggravating factors."

The man's life had "spiralled" downhill since the incident, he said.

"(He) is human and there but for the grace of God go any number of good stand-up men. There are fundamental lessons to be learned but the starting point is that this is not a bad man. He stands convicted of a bad thing."

He told Assistant Justice Charles-Etta Simmons of a number of positive written testimonials as to his client's character, and said that he had suffered enough and now had to rebuild his life and his relationship with his two children.

Ms Graham-Allen drew an apology from Mr. Pettingill after protesting that her office had not been sent the character references and that it was unfair to bring them into the proceedings at such a late stage without given the prosecution an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses.

"We are all subject to anger, we are all subject to passion. We are all subject to depression," Mr. Pettingill said. "And we are all subject to emotional breakdown."

His client was a "good man convicted of a bad thing", he continued.

"You're dealing with a man who loves his boys and hasn't seen them for over a year ... as a result of this offence. There is no greater punishment than that."

And he cited what he said had to be considered as mitigating factors - that he had voluntarily attended counselling and that he had lost his job, his reputation and his standing in the community.

"This is a sad case. They obviously at one time loved each other, shared the joy of having children together," the lawyer said.

Crown counsels Vinette Graham-Allen and Cindy Clarke maintained during the course of the trial that the man had threatened the woman with a knife, punched her in the head repeatedly, before raping her - after she told him that a trip she was planning to New York was none of his business.

The man claimed he was worried about the safety of his children after seeing an online dating agency with a picture of both his wife and the elder son.

The defence had claimed the sex was consensual but admitted that he had hit her. In the end the jury rejected the claim that he had used a knife.

Mrs. Justice Simmons, in her jury directions, said specialist Dr. Monica Hoefert had said the victim had scratches on her back.

At Thursday's hearing she told the man that the law required a pre-sentencing report before she could hand down a sentence.