Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Criminal Sentencing - From: 2003 To: 2003

This page lists 99 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.

 
Regina v JT [2003] EWCA Crim 1011
2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
The provisions of section 68 were punitive, and therefore could not be read to have retrospective effect.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 68 - European Convention on Human Rights 6
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Wassim Malik [2003] 2 Cr App R (S) 113
2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The defendant had set fire to a terraced house by pouring petrol through the letter box in a revenge attack. The occupier of the house escaped to call the fire brigade but a tenant was overwhelmed by smoke fumes and died. The Appellant had offered to plead guilty to manslaughter but that offer had been rejected. Held: There was particular personal mitigation available to him. Having regard to what it called "unusual mitigating factors" the sentence of 15 years imprisonment was quashed and one of 12 years substituted for it.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Wilcox (2003) 1 Cr App R (S) 43
2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed his sentence for breach of a sex offender's order was to prohibit the offender (whose occupation was dealing with children's party equipment) from remaining at a party after the equipment had been assembled. It was not suggested that his breach went further than simply remaining present, on grounds said to be economic necessity. There had been six breaches of which five had occurred after the order had been varied to ease the compliance requirement. Held: The sentence was then described as a shot across the bows because he had treated the order with contempt rather than that he had gone further and caused alarm or distress to any child, and was reduced from two years to twelve months.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Perry [2003] EWCA Crim 2489
2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed against his sentence of four years for breach of a sex offender order. The breach was committed when he was seen pushing the pram of a two year old boy, but there was no suggestion that he had ever been a danger to boys of any age. Held: The sentences was wholly excessive. The sentence was suspended pending further reports. The offender had worked very hard in an effort to address his offending behaviour and the reports recommended continuation of treatment he was receiving.

 
Attorney General's Reference (No. 82 of 2002) [2003] 2 Cr App R (S) 115
2003
CA
Vice-President, Rose LJ
Criminal Sentencing
Where a defendant was thought to have committed a wide range of offences but faced only representative charges, then provided that the admitted basis on which an offender pleads guilty embraces that wider course of conduct, it was proper for a sentencing judge to proceed to pass sentence on that basis
1 Citers



 
 Attorney General's Reference (Nos 8, 9 and 10 of 2002) (Mohammed and others); CACD 2003 - [2003] 1 Cr App R (S) 272
 
Regina v Walters [2003] EWCA Crim 1693
2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

1 Citers


 
Attorney General's References (Nos 58-66 of 2002) (Regina v Warren, Coudjoe and others) [2003] EWCA Crim 636
2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
In the light of the further increase in firearms use, particularly in the case of drug-related crime, this court considered the case of nine offenders, members of a notorious drug-dealing gang in South-East Manchester called the Pitt Bull Crew who carried, sometimes openly, loaded firearms ostensibly for their own protection but also to enforce their territorial claims against rival gangs over a period when shootings regularly occurred and their retail drug dealing was widespread. The ages of the gang members varied between 17 and 25. The court dealt with them in two groups. One of four senior members personally involved in the carrying and use of weapons, the other of five more junior members of the gang who participated in the activities, aware of the possession and use of firearms by others rather than themselves. The court considered the extent to which the criminal activity embodied in the principal charges of conspiracy to supply drugs of classes A and B were aggravated by the possession and use of guns. Held: "In most cases where guns are carried and used, it is desirable to pass a consecutive sentence to mark the additional gravity attributable to the presence of firearms. But if that is done in a case such as this, the sentences which are passed have to be adjusted to ensure that the total sentence is not too high."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Billinger [2003] EWCA Crim 239
2003
CACD
Woiolfe LCJ, Jackson J
Criminal Sentencing
"11.. . . in a case concerning the commission of a series of offences motivated by drug addiction, where the probation service recommend a drug treatment and testing order, the sentencing judge has to make an assessment. Ultimately he is exercising his discretion by reference to all the circumstances of the case. In this case His Honour Judge Selwood carefully considered the recommendation for a drug treatment and testing order. He noted that he had to do a balancing act. In doing that balancing act, the judge took into account the circumstances of the offences and the material revealed by the drug treatment and testing order assessment report. The judge then came to the conclusion that the proper course in this case was to impose a substantial term of imprisonment rather than a drug treatment and testing order.
12. Although we accept that the appellant’s motive for his offending was to feed a drug addiction, that does not compel the conclusion that a proper sentence in the case is a drug treatment and testing order. It seem to us that it must be a matter for the judge’s discretion whether such an order is an appropriate disposal in the instant case. We do not consider that there is any material upon which we should say that the judge erred in the exercise of his discretion or that he came to a decision which was wrong in principle. The judge had regard to the seriousness of the offences before him. He was entitled to do so."
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Brookes; CACD 2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 307

 
 Regina v Davies (CD); CACD 2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 850
 
Attorney General's reference (No 11 of 2003) [2003] NICA 42
2003
CANI

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing
For an offence of possession of approximately 1.5 kilograms of a class A drug, cocaine, with intent to supply, the court increased a sentence of eighteen months to three and a half years. But for the effect of double jeopardy, the sentence would have been five years.
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Ascroft; CACD 2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 2365; [2004] 1 Cr App R (S) 56
 
Regina v Figg [2004] 1 Cr App R (S) 409
2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The defendant had been convicted of indecent assault on facts which would have led to his prosecution for unlawful sexual intercourse if the time limit for that offence had not expired. The court considered the proper basis for sentence.
1 Citers


 
CWA v Her Majesty's Advocate [2003] ScotHC 26
17 Jan 2003
HCJ

Crime, Criminal Sentencing, Scotland

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Stocker Times, 30 January 2003
20 Jan 2003
CACD
Pill, Stanley Burton LJJ, Fawcus J
Criminal Sentencing
Whilst released on licence from prison, the defendant committed further related offences. On sentencing the judge erred in calculating the amount of time to be served for the breach of the licence. Having been recalled, the time served between recall and sentence did not count against the total sentence. Section 39 and section 116 were quite different statutory considerations, with different purposes. The 420 days maximum was to be reduced by twice the number of section 39 days actually served. It was disturbing that courts should still be making such errors.
Criminal Justice Act 1967 67 - Criminal Justice Act 1991 39
1 Cites


 
Attorney General v CCE, NJK and TAG; Attorney General's References (Nos 91, 119, 120 of 2002) Times, 07 February 2003; [2003] EWCA Crim 5; [2003] 2 Cr App R (S) 55
21 Jan 2003
CACD
Lord Justice Mantell Mr Justice Bell Mr Justice Andrew Smith
Criminal Sentencing
The Attorney General referred sentences of the defendants for sexual assaults short of rape. Held: The sentencing considerations outlined in the Millberry guidelines for sentencing in rape cases should be applied also for sexual offences of a lesser degree. Deterrence was an appropriate consideration in all such offences. The long time passed since an offence was committed need not be a reason for reducing sentences. The sentences were increased in each case.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Director of Public Prosecutions of Jamaica v Mollison (No 2) Times, 27 January 2003; [2003] UKPC 6; Gazette, 20 March 2003; [2003] 2 WLR 1160
22 Jan 2003
PC
Bingham of Cornhill, Slynn of Hadley, Clyse, Hutton, Walker of Gestingthorpe LL
Constitutional, Criminal Sentencing, Commonwealth
(Jamaica ) The appellant had been convicted of murder as a youth. He was sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure. The actual length of time to be served was decided by the Governor-General. The decision by the Governor was clearly a sentencing decision, and therefore properly fell to the courts. A decision by him would contravene the requirement of the separation of powers. The provisions under which this methods of dealing with the applicant were unconstitutional, and did not survive the 1962 Constitution. Despite a provision protecting certain regulations, this arrangement was fundamental to a constitution based upon the Westminster model, and the rule was not protected. The appellant was entitled to have the time of detention decided by a court.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
C and D, Regina (on the Application of) v Sheffield Youth Court and Another [2003] EWHC 35 (Admin)
23 Jan 2003
Admn
Stanley Burnton J
Magistrates, Criminal Sentencing
In making its sentencing decision the Youth Court should take into account any undisputed fact put forward in mitigation, such as the good character of the accused, and the Youth Court must consider the sentencing powers of the Crown Court under section 91(3) and the guidance that has been given as to their exercise - "If, on the basis of that guidance, there is no real possibility of such a sentence, committal is inappropriate." and "Was the decision of the Youth Court wrong? The test is one appropriate to a review court rather than one making the original decision. Parliament has clearly given the original decision to the Youth Court, and in terms that admit of some latitude: ... There is normally a range of appropriate sentencing decisions available, and a sentence within that range cannot be said to be wrong: ….It is not sufficient for the High Court to consider that it would have made a different decision under section 24(1) to that of the Youth Court. Only if the High Court is satisfied that the original decision was wrong may it interfere."
Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 24(1)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Toor Times, 03 February 2003
23 Jan 2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The appellants challenged their sentences of two and a half year imprisonment, for having been knowingly concerned in the carrying out of arrangements for facilitating the entry of an illegal immigrant. Held: The appellants had entered into a scheme to arrange for the illegal entry of their brother. The problem was prevalent in the area, and a deterrent sentence was appropriate. Appeals dismissed.

 
Regina v Sallis Times, 07 February 2003
29 Jan 2003
CACD
Holland, Hallett JJ
Magistrates, Criminal Sentencing
The magistrates had made an error in the form of committal, when remitting the defendant to the Crown Court for sentence. Held: The error had the effect of limiting the Crown Court to the powers which had been available to the magistrates. The statement of committal under section 4 had failed to include, as was required, a statement that the magistrates were of the opinion that they also had power to commit the defendant under section 3(2). This had the effect of disapplying section 5 in the crown Court.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 4


 
 Najeeb and Others, Regina v; CACD 30-Jan-2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 194; [2003] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 69; [2003] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 408
 
Regina v Najeeb and similar Times, 05 February 2003
30 Jan 2003
CACD
RoseLJ, Aikens, Mackay JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendants appealed sentences after conviction for their involvement in riots in Bradford. Held: The riots had been extensive over time, causing many serious injuries, and many millions of pounds of damage. All riots affect their communities differently. For an offence involving a leader of a riot, the maximum sentence of ten years might be imposed. For offences involving petrol or other bombs, eight to nine years might be appropriate. Throwing missiles over a period of time could attract a sentence of six to seven years, and those present could expect lower sentences. The fact that each defendant was identified first on camera operated to reduce the discount for guilty pleas, and the need for deterrence required the court to pay less attention to standard mitigations. Nevertheless, here and as it began, the riot was not pre-planned, and some sentences could be reduced accordingly.
1 Cites


 
Regina v Cameron Times, 12 February 2003
5 Feb 2003
CACD
Woolf LCJ, Jackson J
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed his sentence. The judge had imposed a sentence longer than was commensurate with the offence on the basis that such a sentence was required to protect the public from serious harm from the offender. Held: Where a judge was considering making such an order, he must inform counsel and allow representations to be made. The court should first test to see whether the situation fulfilled the conditions. Was the defendant likely to re-offend, and was the harm that would result be sufficiently serious to justify a sentence extended under the Act.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 80(2)(b)

 
Parnham, Regina v [2003] EWCA Crim 416
7 Feb 2003
CACD
Jackson, Elias JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed against his sentence of six years for manslaughter. His wife had attacked him with an iron bar and he had defended himself and hit her causing her death. Held: The court had not given credit for his plea of guilty, and that this was a case of involuntary manslaughter. Although the blows struck by the deceased caused some injury, the appellant received no serious injuries. On the other hand, the attack upon his wife was one of excessive ferocity. That ferocity was treated by the jury as being indicative of a frenzied state which had the consequence that the appellant did not intend to cause the really serious bodily injury which self-evidently was bound to follow from the blows he struck with an iron bar. Allowing for the guilty plea, the correct sentence was four years.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (M) v Inner London Crown Court Times, 27 February 2003; [2003] EWHC 301 (Admin); [2003] 1 FLR 994
10 Feb 2003
QBD
Rose LJ, Henriques J
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Education, Crime
The applicant's daughter had been convicted of a petty assault, and she had herself been made subject of a twelve month parenting order. She appealed. Held: Parenting orders are proper within a democratic society, and do not infringe a parent's right to respect for family life. Nevertheless, no responsible bench could have made such an order in this case.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Ovenell v Premier Monitoring Services Ltd [2003] EWHC 387 (Admin)
11 Feb 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v BDG; CACD 11-Feb-2003 - [2003] 2 Cr App R 13; [2003] EWCA Crim 319; [2003] 1 Cr App R (S) 26
 
Regina v Robinson (Sean) Times, 19 February 2003
14 Feb 2003
CACD
Kennedy LJ, McCombe, Treacy JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed against a sentence of imprisonment. He had driven a power boat dangerously, and whilst he was under the influence of alcohol, and had caused a death. The deceased's mother said she did not wish him to serve a sentence of imprisonment. Held: There was no statutory equivalent of driving under the influence of alcohol for driving powerboats on public waterways. Nevertheless, those who behaved in this way on public waterways must face real not suspended sentences. Taking account of the attitude of the deceased's mother the sentence, which would otherwise have been two years, would be set at eighteen months.

 
Regina v Foggon Times, 19 February 2003; [2003] EWCA Crim 270; Gazette, 17 April 2003; [2003] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 85
14 Feb 2003
CACD
Mantell, LJ, Morland, Jack JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order, after conviction for cheating the public revenue. Funds had been diverted from his company to avoid payment of taxes. Held: Tax which was avoided would fall under the section and be a pecuniary advantage 'obtained by an offender' within the section only if he benefitted himself. This could be either because the tax was his own personal liability, or as in this case, the company was seen only as a front for the defendant himself, and the corporate veil was to be pierced.
Criminal justice Act 1988 71(5)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
M v the Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 03 March 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 146; Gazette, 17 April 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 1980
19 Feb 2003
CA
Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Ward
Criminal Sentencing, Immigration
The applicant had been given indefinite leave to remain in England, but was later convicted of indecent assault, and recommended for deportation. On appeal the court said that the order for deportation was disproportionate. After serving his sentence and on release. The respondent decided that he should be deported under the 1971 Act, but gave no reasons. Held: Where a court had once considered the issues and decided that deportation would be wrong on the merits of the case, the Secretary of State must give appropriate weight to that decision when making his own. An administrative decision inconsistent with a decision of a court on the same issue and same material was permissible so long as it was properly explained: "… A duty owed by one decision-maker – A – to take account of the views or decision of another decision–maker – B – upon the same or an overlapping issue means nothing whatever unless A has to engage with what B has said: to explain, however shortly, why he differs from it he does."
Immigration Act 1971 3(5)(a)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v October Times, 11 March 2003; Gazette, 24 April 2003
27 Feb 2003
CACD
Scott Baker LJ, Pitchford J, Sir Edwin Jowitt
Criminal Sentencing
The court had adjourned its proceedings in the absence of the defendant, so as not to fall foul of the requirement that a confiscation inquiry must take place within six months of conviction. The defendant appealed. Held: The court could exercise its common law power to adjourn. The statutory power could only be exercised where the defendant appeared at court. The common law exercise of the power was valid, and in accord with Sekhon.
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 2(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Thompson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWHC 538 (Admin)
7 Mar 2003
Admn

Health, Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]

 
 Wilkes, Regina v; CACD 7-Mar-2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 848; [2003] 2 Cr App R (S) 105
 
Regina v Normanton Times, 21 July 2003
10 Mar 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, Gross, Pitchers JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed his sentence for assault. Held: The was an incident of road rage. There were considerable mitigating factors, and the sentence would be reduced to six weeks, but immediate imprisonment will normally follow an assault occasioning actual bodily harm in the context of a road rage confrontation.
Offences Against the Persons Act 1892

 
Regina v Collins (David) Times, 15 April 2003
18 Mar 2003
CACD
Woolf LCJ, Gage, Moses JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The court in allowing the applicant's sentencing appeal confirmed that the restorative justice sentencing system appears to be effective. It was not to be seen as a soft option, and his readiness to take part was properly to be reflected in a reduced sentence.

 
Nazir, Regina v [2003] EWCA Crim 901; [2003] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 114
18 Mar 2003
CACD
Lord Woolf of Barnes LCJ, Gage, Moses JJ
Criminal Sentencing
Appeal from sentence of three months imprisonment for misconduct in a public office.
[ Bailii ]
 
Lucas v The United Kingdom 39013/02; [2003] ECHR 717
18 Mar 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing
Detention for a few hours following arrest for wilful obstruction of the highway and then a fine was proportionate: "An analysis of the Court's case-law . . reveals that the Contracting States' discretion in punishing illegal conduct intertwined with expression or association, although wide, is not unlimited. It goes hand in hand with European supervision by the Court, whose task it is to give a final ruling on whether the penalty was compatible with Article 10 or 11. The Court must examine with particular scrutiny the cases where sanctions imposed by the national authorities for non-violent conduct involve a prison sentence."
European Convention on Human Rights
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Evans v Evans [2003] EWCA Civ 593
24 Mar 2003
CA

Contempt of Court, Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Cooksley, Stride, Cook, Crump v Regina; Attorney General's Reference No 152 of 2002 Times, 08 April 2003; [2003] EWCA Crim 996; Gazette, 12 June 2003; [2003] RTR 483
3 Apr 2003
CACD
Mr Justice Gage Mr Justice Moses Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales
Criminal Sentencing
JUDGMENT SUMMARY
(Not part of the judgment of the Court)
The judgment which is being handed down today relates to an Attorney General's Reference and three appeals against sentence. The cases have been listed together to enable the Court to decide whether to give sentencing guidelines for the offences of causing death by dangerous driving and causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs.
We have decided to issue fresh guidelines and have based those guidelines on the published advice of the Sentencing Advisory Panel. The only significant departure from the Panel's advice is that the Court has identified four categories of offending, whereas the Panel gave three. The reason for this departure is that it was felt by the court that the more specific guidelines which were possible if four categories of offending were identified would provide greater assistance to sentencers.
The guidelines indicate that, while sentences of imprisonment should only be imposed where necessary, normally the only appropriate sentence for an offender found guilty of these offences is a custodial sentence. The guidelines set out features which can aggravate and mitigate offences. In particular, we indicate that, if the dangerous driving causes more than one death, that is a seriously aggravating feature. We have also adopted the view of the Sentencing Advisory Panel that falling asleep at the wheel is more likely to aggravate than mitigate the seriousness of the offence. Drivers do not normally fall asleep without warning and the proper course of action for a motorist who feels drowsy is to stop driving and rest.
Other aggravating factors identified in the guidelines are the consumption of drugs or alcohol, greatly excessive speed, racing, competitive driving against another vehicle, ‘showing off', driving while the driver's attention is avoidable distracted (e.g. by reading or by use of a mobile phone) and driving a poorly maintained or dangerously loaded vehicle. On the other hand, among the mitigating factors are a good driving record, a timely plea of guilty, genuine shock or remorse and the fact that the offender has also been seriously injured as a result of the accident caused by the dangerous driving.
The guidelines describe four starting points appropriate when sentencing adults who have not pleaded guilty to the offence:
12 to 18 months imprisonment where there are no aggravating circumstances;
2 to 3 years where a momentary dangerous error of judgment or a short period of bad driving is aggravated by, for example, irresponsible behaviour. Where more than one of the aggravating factors is present, 5 years imprisonment could be appropriate;
4 to 5 years in cases of higher culpability; and
6 years or over in the most serious cases.
The expression ‘starting point' is used because the sentencing judge will vary this figure according to the circumstances of the particular case. In the judgment, we give an example derived from a previous case decided by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in which a sentence of 10 years, the maximum sentence, was appropriately imposed.
We agree with the Panel that there is currently an unduly large gap between the maximum sentence of 2 years for dangerous driving (which can result in catastrophic injuries) and 10 years for an offence in which the same standard of driving "has by chance resulted in death". We therefore welcome the proposal to increase the maximum sentence for the basic offence of dangerous driving to 5 years imprisonment. We do not, however, see any need to increase the maximum of 10 years imprisonment for those offences where death is caused. This is because there is also an offence of motor manslaughter in relation to which any sentence up to and including life imprisonment can be imposed.
The judgment indicates that a factor that courts should bear in mind in determining the appropriate sentence is how important it is to drive home the message that dangerous driving has a potentially horrific impact. Motor vehicles can be lethal if not driven properly. Drivers must know that, if a person is killed as a result of their driving dangerously, a custodial sentence will normally be imposed no matter what the mitigating circumstances.
The Court also points out that the effect of the offence on the victim's family is a matter that the courts can and should take into account, but repeats the words of Lord Taylor CJ:
"We wish to stress that human life cannot be restored, nor can its loss be measured by the length of a prison sentence. We recognise that no term of months or years imposed on the offender can reconcile the family of a deceased victim to their loss, nor will it cure their anguish."
On the other hand, the judgment indicates that the family's wish for vengeance cannot dictate the sentence.
What is set out above is no substitute for reading the judgment. A summary cannot give the full effect of the judgment which should be read together with the advice of the Sentencing Advisory Panel.
Road Traffic Act 1988 1
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina on the Application of Maria Smith v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWHC 692 (Admin); Times, 11 April 2003; Gazette, 19 June 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 2176
3 Apr 2003
QBD
Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Mitchell
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
The case asked what duty the respondent had, in respect of youths sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty's Pleasure before 30th November 2000, to review their continued detention at regular intervals. A statement said that once a tarriff had been set the Secretary would only consider matters relating to the crime or the defendant's state of mind at that time. After V the courts were given the task of setting the tarriff. It was now said that the practice set down in Venables applied to the executive only and was no longer applicable. Held: What matters is the nature of the sentence, ie to be detained during Her Majesty’s pleasure. She therefore had the right to have her tariff or minimum period reviewed from time to time for all of the reasons spelt out by the majority in Venables. The situation in relation to those sentenced prior to 30th November 2000 is still governed by the decision of the House of Lords in Venables.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 90(1) - Children and Young Persons Act 1933 53(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (Uttley) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWHC 950 (Admin)
8 Apr 2003
Admn
Moses J
Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing
The court had to consider consider whether the application of statutory provisions requiring a prisoner to be released on licence, that were not applicable at the date of the offence, violated Article 7. The claimant had been sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment for various sex offences. Held: They did not. The essential question is whether the statutory imposition of the licence constituted the imposition of a penalty greater than that which would have been imposed at the time he committed the offences. The purpose of a licence was to enable a long-term prisoner to stay out of trouble, both for his own benefit and for the benefit of the community and so that he did not again lose his liberty. The nature and purpose of the licence are such that they dominate the factors which go to the conclusion as to whether the imposition of a licence is a penalty or not. The imposition of a licence is designed to protect the public once an prisoner is released, and assist in preventing the prisoner from committing further offences.
European Convention on Human Rights 7.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Attorney-General's Reference (No 14 of 2003) Regina v Sheppard Times, 18 April 2003; Gazette, 19 June 2003
9 Apr 2003
CACD
Kay LJ, Goldring, Cox JJ
Criminal Sentencing, Criminal Practice
The Attorney-General sought to refer a sentence to the Court of Appeal as too lenient. Held: The Act introduced a new power, but provided several protections. The Attorney-General had himself to consider the sentence to be too lenient, and he exercised a discretion, not a duty, to refer the case. The Court of Appeal was to be asked to give leave to refer the case, and itself consider whether it was too lenient. The Court of Appeal's leave should not be considered to be automatic. Here the reference was misconceived, mentioning elements which should not have been included, and excluding matters of mitigation which should have been mentioned. The Attorney-General had exercised his discretion under a mistake. Leave was refused.
Criminal Law Act 1977 1
1 Citers


 
David Ruddick v Regina [2003] EWCA Crim 1061; Times, 06 May 2003; [2004] 1 Cr App R (S) 52
16 Apr 2003
CACD
Mr Justice Leveson Lord Justice Rose Mr Justice Morison
Criminal Sentencing
A judge was required to take into account a confiscation order before making an order for costs, but that need not invalidate the orders. Was a financial order made before the forfeiture process was complete void or merely a ground for appeal? The words of the statute were mandatory, but it should not be supposed that a failure to follow the order created a nullity. It allowed the defendant instead to appeal and argue that the order might be different. "It seems to us that the structure and purpose of the statutory provisions is essentially to ensure that the defendant is not exposed to double jeopardy; that is, he should not be sentenced and then find that he is being punished yet again with a … confiscation order. … Two sentencing processes for one offence is unfair; but two or more orders made during one sentencing process is not unfair, even where the orders are not made during just one court appearance. The second and important requirement, as a matter of fairness, is that the one sentencing process should not be protracted over an unduly long period."
The court considered the time limit of six months: "Will a failure to hold a [confiscation] hearing within six months make any [confiscation] order a nullity? If without exceptional circumstances the defendant had not had a [confiscation] order made against him within six months of the date of postponement, then in our view no such order could lawfully be made. The time limit is there to protect the defendant from unfairness through justice being unduly delayed. Like other limitation periods, Parliament has intended a cut-off date which, subject only to exceptional circumstances, entitles a defendant to be free from the risk of further punishment. The fact that the court is given a limited discretion to extend the time beyond that date ["exceptional circumstances"] supports this view."
The court then considered the need to set a date when consideration of a confiscation order was postponed: "Must the court specify a new date for the resumed hearing? The period of postponement ('for such period as [the court] may specify') does not mean that a fixed date must be specified. Parliament cannot have intended that result, since it is obvious that in many cases it is simply not possible or practical to determine a new date then and there. Again, it is the fact that the defendant knows that the sentencing process is not yet over and that there may be more to come that is the essence of the requirement; he is not so concerned to know when, precisely, the matter will come back. Thus, the inability or failure to specify the "return" date does not make the postponement a nullity or render null any order made thereafter."
Criminal Justice Act 1988 72A(9)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
C, Regina (on the Application of) v Sussex (Central) Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 1157 (Admin)
30 Apr 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing, Magistrates

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Wright v Her Majesty's Advocate [2003] ScotHC 18
2 May 2003
HCJ
Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Kirkwood, Lord Marnoch, Lord Reed, Lord McCluskey
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed his sentence of life imprisonment for assault and attempted rape, with a minimum of twelve years to be served. The trial judge was right in deciding that, because of the risk that the appellant presented to women, a discretionary life sentence was appropriate. It was argued for him that, in view of O'Neill, the trial judge had erred, particularly in his failure to apply a reduction of fifty percent on account of the early release provisions in the 1993 Act. In view of Ansari it was appropriate to set the sentence again. In view of the gravity of the sexual offence, the related offence of assault, the appellant's criminal record, and the fact that he committed this crime during the unexpired portion of a previous sentence, the notional determinate sentence, under exclusion of the risk element (cf. Ansari), should be 13 years. The notional determinate sentence should reflect the idea of general deterrence as well as deterrence of the offender himself. In view of the gravity of the case, as in Ansari, a high proportion of that figure should be applied to reach the punishment part. Appeal allowed to the extent of fixing the punishment part of the life sentence at a period of 9 years and of backdating that.
Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Ansari v Her Majesty's Advocate [2003] ScotHC 17
2 May 2003
HCJ
Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Kirkwood, Lord Marnoch, Lord Reed, Lord McCluskey
Scotland, Criminal Sentencing
The applicant assaulted and abducted an innocent passer-by, a young woman of 23, in the streets of Aberdeen and drove her, bound and gagged, to his house in Leith where he stripped her naked and assaulted and raped her. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, but now challenged the fixed part of that sentence. Held: In the assessment of the minimum period that the discretionary life sentence prisoner would actually serve as a punishment for his crime before he could be released, that prisoner should not be at a disadvantage when compared with a prisoner serving a determinate sentence for a similar crime. The court, when fixing the designated part, should therefore keep in view that the determinate sentence prisoner would be eligible for release on licence after one-half of his sentence, and entitled to it after two-thirds. The appeal was allowed. When imposing an indeterminate life sentence, the court must ask what determinate sentence would have applied, then deduct some 'risk' element, and then fix a proportion of the notional determinate sentence, as now reduced, in the light of the early release provisions that would be available to a prisoner sentenced to a determinate sentence for the same offence.
Crime and Punishment (Scotland) Act 1997 16
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Yusuf Times, 12 May 2003
6 May 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, Grigson Beatson JJ
Criminal Sentencing, Contempt of Court
It is essential that witnesses who had been called to attend court should do so. The public have a duty to co-operate with the courts. The appellant was called to be a witness in a murder trial. A witness summons had been served, but he did not attend. Held: He had claimed to be afraid, but had retracted parts of his statement. The judge in this case had dealt with the appellant fairly, and there was no bias. The sentence of the maximim of three months' imprisonment for contempt was appropriate given the deliberate act and the consequences.


 
 Regina v Whitehead; CACD 8-May-2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 1271
 
Regina (Martin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 15 May 2003
8 May 2003
QBD
Maurice Kay, J
Prisons, Criminal Sentencing
The defendant had been convicted of murder. On appeal a conviction of manslaughter had been substituted, and a new sentence substituted. The parole board had come to consider his early release. Held: The remarks of the judge at the trial should now be given less weight than those of the later sentencing exercise. In this case the board had incorrectly declined to admit the record of the later hearing,but had themselves later cnfirmed that having now read it, it would not have made a difference to their decision against early release.

 
Regina v Drew [2003] UKHL 25; Times, 09 May 2003; Gazette, 03 July 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 1213; [2004] 1 Cr App R (S) 8; (2004) 75 BMLR 34; [2003] 2 Cr App R 24; [2003] 4 All ER 557
8 May 2003
HL
L Bingham of Cornhill, L Steyn, L Hutton, L Millett, L Rodger of Earlsferry
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Health
The defendant was mentally ill. He had been convicted of a second serious offence, and now appealed the life sentence imposed. Psychiatrists had recommended a hospital order, but such an order could not now be made by virtue of the 2000 Act save in exceptional circumstances. It was said to be wrong automatically to impose a life sentence on the mentally ill and not criminally culpable, being "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" within the unqualified prohibition, and the sections requiring imposition of such sentences where the offender is mentally ill, would be incompatible with article 3. Held: The advantage of the life sentence is its flexibility. A determinate sentence would eventually result in release with no control. Courts had been reluctant to impose life sentences, and the Act was a response to that. It was not arbitrary, but proportionate and compliant.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 109 - Mental Health Act 1983 37 - Crime (Sentences) Act 1977 2 - European Convention on Human Rights 3
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Attorney-General's Reference (No 10 of 2003); Regina v Jutue Times, 30 May 2003
14 May 2003
CACD
Kennedy LJ, Pitcher J and Sir Michael Wright
Criminal Sentencing
A case had been referred to the court, but the court was unhappy about the state of the reference. It was essential that reference should be seen by counsel in the case so that he could check it. It should not be based upon the evidence as it stood before the hearing, but must allow for developments in that evidence at the trial.
1 Cites



 
 Regina v McCartney, Hamlett, Beddow and Hulme; CACD 16-May-2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 1372
 
Stewart v Doncaster Youth Offending Team [2003] EWHC 1128 (Admin)
20 May 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing

Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 104
[ Bailii ]
 
C v Balham Youth Court [2003] EWHC 1332 (Admin)
22 May 2003
Admn
Scott Baker LJ
Criminal Sentencing, Children
The court discussed sentencing practice on very young offenders: "The fact than an offender … does not qualify for a detention and training order because he is only 14 and not a persistent offender is not an exceptional circumstance to justify passing a sentence of less than two years under section 91 of the 2000 Act." The relevant question was whether it was such a serious case that detention above two years would or might realistically be required. Two 14 year olds attempted to rob another 14 year old and no weapons were used, although one was threatened. The court found it inappropriate to think in terms of two years or more.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Simpson v Regina [2003] EWCA Crim 1499; Times, 26 May 2003; Gazette, 10 July 2003; [2004] QB 118; [2003] 3 WLR 337; [2003] Cr App R 36; [2004] 1 Cr App R (S) 24; [2003] 2 Cr App R 36; [2003] 3 All ER 531
23 May 2003
CACD
Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Mitchell Mrs Justice Hallett Mr Justice Pitchers Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales
Criminal Sentencing
The appellant challenged a confiscation order. It was argued that one could not be made unless a proper notice had been given, and none of the offences occurred before 1995. On the assumption that section 1 of the 1995 Act was not in force, did the fact that the notice served by the prosecution was not in the form required by section 72, CJA 1988 mean that the court had no jurisdiction to make a confiscation order? Held: The court had sat with 5 judges to consider the decision in Sekhon. The rules as to precedent reflect the practice of the courts and have to be applied bearing in mind that their objective is to assist in the administration of justice. The law was misunderstood and misapplied in Palmer. The court applied Sekhon and found that it had jurisdiction to make the order. Having considered the evidence put before the judge, his conclusions as to the resources available to the defendant were not to be criticised. The provisions concerning postponement were directory only.
Lord Woolf CJ: "The rules as to precedent reflect the practice of the courts and have to be applied bearing in mind that their objective is to assist in the administration of justice. They are of considerable importance because of their role in achieving the appropriate degree of certainty as to the law. This is an important requirement of any system of justice. The principles should not, however, be regarded as so rigid that they cannot develop in order to meet contemporary needs. "
Criminal Justice Act 1988 71
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Easterbrook v The United Kingdom 48015/99; Times, 18 June 2003; [2003] ECHR 278; [2003] 37 EHHR 812
12 Jun 2003
ECHR

Criminal Sentencing, Constitutional, Human Rights
The prisoner was convicted of an armed robbery in which a policeman had been shot, and had been sentenced to life imprisonment. The judge set no tariff himself. The tariff was set by the Home Secretary, but only after some time. The discretionary life prisoner had been refused the right to make oral representations to the Lord Chief Justice upon him recommending the tariff he was to serve. Held: There had been a violation of Article 6.1 regarding the procedure adopted in fixing the applicant's tariff: "The Court would observe that the sentencing exercise carried out in criminal cases must necessarily be carried out by an independent and impartial tribunal, namely a court offering guarantees and procedure of a judicial nature. It was not a court that fixed the applicant's tariff in a public adversarial hearing and in the circumstances it is not sufficient to satisfy the fundamental principal relating the separation of powers that the member of the executive who issued the decision was guided by judicial opinion".
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Worldlii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina on the Application of Clift v Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 25 June 2003; CO4732/2002; [2003] EWHC 1337 (Admin); Gazette, 28 August 2003
13 Jun 2003
Admn
The Honourable Mr Justice Hooper
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Prisons
The claimant had been sentenced to 18 years imprisonment. He challenged the differing treatment for parole purposes of those sentenced to more than 15 years, as infringing his human rights, insofar as the decision was retained by the Home Secretary. Held: The decision itself was clearly not irrational. As to the involvement of the Home Secretary, the court applied the four stage sequence of analysis from Michalak. (i) Does it fall within a substantive convention provisions (ii) If so, was there different treatment between the complainant other comparitors? (iii) Were the chosen comparators analogous? (iv) If so, did the difference in treatment have an objective and reasonable justification? As to 1) Legislation on early release on parole falls within Article 5(1) to engage Article 14. On 2) there was a difference, and the comparators were analagous. The difference in treatment was however justified because of the particular difficulties making decisions realting to such offenders.
European Convention on Human Rights 5 14 - Criminal Justice Act 1991 35 50
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
McFetrich, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWHC 1542 (Admin); CO/4937/2002; Times, 28 July 2003; Gazette, 11 September 2003
30 Jun 2003
Admn
Lord Justice Scott Baker And Mr Justice Pitchford
Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing
The defendant had been convicted of murder in Scotland. He requested a transfer to an English prison. The trial judge recommended a tariff of eight years which was eventually set at 12 years by the respondent. That figure also exceeded the maximum recommended by the English judges who had reviewed the sentence. He complained that this infringed his article 7 right, since the penalty was higher than it would have been in Scotland. The Scottish tariff had been recommended but not set before his transfer. Held: There were differences between the Scottish and English systems for setting the tariffs, but the transfer applied the English system. The true sentence was one of life imprisonment. The applicant's article 7 rights were not affected and the application for judicial review failed.
Criminal Justice Act 1961 26(1) - European Convention on Human Rights 7.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Watson, Regina (on the Application Of) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2003] EWHC 1751 (Admin)
7 Jul 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Cole and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWHC 1789 (Admin)
10 Jul 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Czyzewski; Regina v Bryan; Regina v Mitchell; Regina v Diafi; Regina v Ward; CACD 16-Jul-2003 - Times, 25 July 2003; [2004] 1 Cr App R (S) 49; [2003] EWCA Crim 2139; [2003] EWCA Crim 2305
 
Regina v Benfield; Regina v Sobers Times, 01 September 2003; [2004] 1 Cr Aoo R 8
21 Jul 2003
CACD
Lord Woolf LCJ, Penry-Davey, Aikens JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendants appealed life sentences for second serious offences under s109. They had been convicted of robbery. Held: The offence of robbery existed at the time when the 200 Act was created, and it was inconceivable that the new Act required in effect a creation of a secand variant of the offence involving the use of a firearm. It should therefore be necessary to spell it out in the indictment. The defendant must still however have opportunity to obtain a verdict which clarified any factual issues relevant to the Act. The issue would be determined in his favour unless the offence established that he had a firearm as envisaged. Because the fact could lead to an automatic life sentence it was necessary that the fact should be settled clearly, and any doubt given to the defendant.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 109
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Brooks (Michael) Times, 29 July 2003
21 Jul 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, McCombe, Cox JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant had been tried for murder, but a defence of provocation was permitted to reduce the conviction to manslaughter. He appealed sentence. Held: The defendant had dismembered the victim's body. He had been the victim of abuse by the victim since trhe age of 11. In such circumstances, where the basis of accepting the plea was provocation rather than diminished responsibility, the fact of dismemberment might well be an aggravating factor. The cases of manslaughter can vary widely. In this case the dismemberment remained an aggravating feature, but on balance the sentence as a whole should still be reduced to five years to allow for the appellant's age, and the history of sexual abuse.
1 Cites


 
Regina v R (Sentencing: Extended licences) Times, 04 August 2003
25 Jul 2003
CACD
Kennedy LJ, Pitchers J
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
The imposition of an extended period of licence in respect of offences committed before 1992 did not infringe the defendant's human rights. The defendant had been convicted of offences from 1976 and 1982. The commencement date for the 1991 Act was 1 October 1992. Held: The true nature of the provision was preventive, to ensure that some control was retained over a sex offender released early on licence, rather than punitive. The JT case had been decided without full reference to reported cases and was given per incuriam.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 86 - European Convention on Human Rights A-7 - Criminal Justice Act 1991 44
1 Cites


 
Regina v Vivian David Bright [2003] EWCA Crim 2169
25 Jul 2003
CACD
Mr Justice Gage Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Curtis
Crime, Criminal Sentencing
Appeals against convictions and sentences for sexual assault.
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina on the Application of Uttley v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 1130; Times, 04 August 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 2590
30 Jul 2003
CA
Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Longmore Mr Justice Maurice Kay
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
Licence conditions imposed at the time of sentence would restrict the defendant after he had served his sentence and been released, and so operated as a heavier penalty, and section 33(1) was incompatible with the defendant's Art 7.1 rights. Held: Before the 1991 Act, a prisoner was entitled to release after serving the necessary part of his sentence without additional conditions. Provisions for early release were part of the sentence, and were punitive in nature. Whether punitive or preventive, they operated to restrict the defendant.
Pill LJ said: "In my judgment the licence is plainly a part of the sentence originally imposed by the sentencing judge . . While licence conditions vary and in some cases will be more onerous than in others, it is not and cannot be disputed that conditions will inevitably be imposed which are impediments upon the offender's freedom of action . . Arguments that the purpose of the licence procedures is rehabilitative and preventative, as undoubtedly in part they are, do not detract from their onerous nature viewed as part of the sentence. Whatever the purpose, the effect is onerous."
Criminal Justice Act 1991 33(2) - European Court of Human Rights A-7.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Hart v Anglian Water Services Ltd Times, 18 August 2003
31 Jul 2003
CACD

Environment, Criminal Sentencing, Utilities
In a private prosecution, Mr Hart complained that the defendant had allowed untreated sewage to be discharged into controlled waters. The defendant pleaded guilty, but now appealed the fine of £200,000. Held: The sentence was imposed on the basis that the discharge was substantial, and the effect on the environment disastrous. The defendant had many convictions for similar offences. Such discharges were properly characterised as criminal, and it was a question of what priority was given to prevention by the company. There was no standard tariff or scale of penalties, and the court declined to set one, referring only to a guideline booklet produced by the Magistrates association. Here the fine remained manifestly excessive, and was reduced to £60,000.
Water Resources Act 1991 85(3)


 
 Turnbull v Middlesbrough Borough Council; CA 28-Aug-2003 - Times, 15 September 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 1327; Gazette, 16 October 2003
 
Scott and Another v Easthorpe and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1289
10 Sep 2003
CA

Contempt of Court, Criminal Sentencing

County Courts Act 1984
[ Bailii ]
 
Attorney General's Reference (No 5 of 2003), Richard Herbert Crowe [2003] NICA 38,
29 Sep 2003
CANI
Carswell LCJ
Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing
Persons convicted of possession of drugs with intent to supply "must ordinarily expect a custodial sentence", although the court did not interfere with the sentence imposed because of the exceptional nature of the case,
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Attorney General Reference No 34 of 2003 [2003] EWCA Crim 3073
3 Oct 2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
C v Sunderland Youth Court [2003] EWHC 2385 (Admin)
9 Oct 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing, Magistrates

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 1
[ Bailii ]

 
 Practice Direction (Criminal proceedings: Sentence appeals); CACD 10-Oct-2003 - Times, 24 October 2003
 
Attorney-General's Reference (No 42 of 2003) Times, 23 October 2003
15 Oct 2003
CACD
Kay LJ, Poole J
Criminal Sentencing
The Defendant, in his thirties, had befriended young girls on the Internet, and met up and committed sexual assaults. Held: Where a considerably older man used the internet to attract and meet very young girls for sexual exploitation, the sentences should be at the severe end of the scale. There may remain scope for consideration by Parliament of increasing the range of penalties available yet further.


 
 Regina v Belli; CACD 20-Oct-2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 2752
 
Attorney-General's Reference (No 37, 38, 44, 45, 51, 53, 35, 40, 43, 45, 41 and 42 of 2003) Times, 29 October 2003; [2004] 1 Cr App R (S) 499
23 Oct 2003
CACD
Kay LJ, Poole, Treacy JJ
Criminal Sentencing
Several appeals were heard on references against unduly lenient sentences of sex offenders. Held: Courts faced particular difficulties when sentencing sex offenders, but there exist guideline cases, and a court engagaed in such a sentencing exercise should be conversant with the guideline cases, and act accordingly. Guideline cases are not to be applied mechanically, but nevertheless the sentencers in several of these cases had focussed on the offender and not given appropriate attention to the victims. In cases where a perpetrartor had taken advantage of his standing in the community to find a victim, it was difficult to see how he could use the same standing to minimise the sentence. Sentences were variously increased.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Jameson, Attorney General's Reference No 88 of 2002 [2003] EWCA Crim 3011
4 Nov 2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Greaves Times, 12 November 2003
4 Nov 2003
CACD
Lord Woolf LCJ, Douglas Brown, Wakerley JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The appellant had been convicted of robbery, and sentenced to seven years. The judge had added a sentence for possession of a prohibited weapon (a gas cannister) of three years consecutive. The defendant appealed the sentence. Held: It was correct to make a sentence for the use of weapons run consecutive to the main offence. If Clarke suggested a consecutive sentence was not appropriate than it should be recognised that that was no longer correct. Even so the court must still look at the totality of the sentence.
1 Cites


 
Attorney General's Reference No 88 of 2002 (Lee Hahn and Peter Webster) [2003] EWCA Crim 3011; [2003] EWCA Crim 3010; [2003] EWCA Crim 3089
7 Nov 2003
CACD
Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Cresswell Mr Justice Langley
Criminal Sentencing
The Attorney General referred the sentences as too lenient for armed robbery, and aggravated vehicle taking. The defendants worked as a team, and used an imitation firearm, and threatened a victim with it. Held: The possession of firearms should be regarded as an aggravating feature in relation to other offences. When passing sentence, it is appropriate to render the sentence passed in respect of the firearms offence consecutive to that in respect of the other offences. However, the judge must have regard to the principle of totality in arriving at the appropriate overall sentence imposed. The judge had used the correct approach. The appeal failed.
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 18 - Criminal Justice Act 1988 36
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 Olubitan v Regina; CACD 7-Nov-2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 2940; Times, 07 November 2003; [2004] 2 Cr App R (S) 70
 
Regina v Thackwray Unreported, 11 November 2003
11 Nov 2003
CACD
Woolf LCJ, Douglas Brown, Pitchford JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant was on bail for one offence when he committed the offence now under consideration. He was later acquitted of the offence for which he was on bail, and now appealed the sentence, saying the judge had taken the offence as aggravated because it was committed whilst on bail. Held: The judge had been correct to treat the bail element as an aggravation, even though he was later acquitted.

 
Gorgievski v Customs and Excise and Another [2003] EWHC 2773 (Admin)
12 Nov 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Hawar Hussein Ali [2003] EWCA Crim 3214; Times, 21 November 2003
14 Nov 2003
CACD
Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Cresswell Mr Justice Davis
Crime, Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed conviction and sentence for sexual assaults on young girls. He complained that the prosecution had been allowed to bring in evidence of previous consistent statements. Held: The evidence of the mother had been admitted in a manner agreed between the defence and prosecutor, and the defence had not gone outside the agreement. Though there might be a residual discretion to allow re-examination to introduce evidence of previous consistent statements, that did not apply here. The evidence should not have been admitted. Nevertheless, no substantial unfairness had occurred. On sentence, the sentences were manifestly excessive, and sentences of 15 months were substituted.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Attorney General's Reference Nos 5-8 of 2003 (Davies, Rowan, Abbey, Hassan); CACD 14-Nov-2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 3185
 
Regina v Backwell [2003] EWCA Crim 3213; Times, 15 December 2003
18 Nov 2003
CACD
Mr Justice Butterfield Lord Justice Mantell Mrs Justice Cox
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed against a sentence for violent sexual assaults. Charges of rape were left on the file. He had toured the streets of Torquay selecting women who, for drink or otherwise, would be less able to resist. The judge thought a proper sentence on each count was 4 years’, increased to 6 years, concurrent for the first 6 incidents but consecutive for the last, which was almost attempted rape. The total sentence was 12 years. Held: Baker and Everleigh showed that the principle applied was correct. The sentences were commensurate with his record and the nature of the offences.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v NcNaghten Times, 15 January 2004
19 Nov 2003
CACD
Judge LJ, Silber, Cox JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed his sentence for five separate assaults. The sentences had been consecutive, but the victoim had been the same on each occasion. Held: The fact that the victim was the same was not a reason in principle why consecutive sentences should be imposed, nor that the offences took place within a domestic environment. Given the bond of trust which existed, it may be an aggravating feature. The sentence must still abide by principles applying to the totality of a sentence. The appeal was dismissed.

 
Attorney General Reference No 64 of 2003 [2003] EWCA Crim 3514
20 Nov 2003
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Attorney-General's Reference (No 64 of 2003) Times, 01 December 2003; [2004] 2 Cr App R (S) 106
20 Nov 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, Tugendhat J
Criminal Sentencing
The attorney general sought re-assessment of the defendant's sentence of a Drug treatment and testing order. Held: When considering a Drug Treatment and Testing Order, the court should consider: the realistic possibility that such orders may reduce drug addiction, that it was not appropriate where the defendant had committed many offenders whilst under the influence of drugs, he had to be determined to be free of drugs, they were more successful with younger offenders, they are rarely appropriate in case of serious violence, they are appropriate for offences undertaken to pay for drugs, they might still be appropriate where a large number of offences were involved, the court should look at the effect on the victim, and behaviour after the apprehension could be indicative. In this case a sentence of four years was substituted.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Balkissoon Roodal v The State [2003] UKHL 78; Times, 26 November 2003; Gazette, 15 January 2004; [2004] 2 WLR 652; Gazette, 05 February 2004
20 Nov 2003
PC
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Millett, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Constitutional, Criminal Sentencing, Commonwealth
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant challenged the automatic death sentence imposed upon him for murder. Held: There were conflicting constitutional provisions. Following Fisher, in the context of issues of capital sentences a wider view was required. The death penalty should no longer be read as mandatory. Legislation since 1976 meant that the court now had a ciscretion to impose imprisonment.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Regina (on the Application of Dudson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice [2003] EWHC 2797 (Admin); Times, 27 November 2003
21 Nov 2003
Admn
Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Mackay
Criminal Sentencing, Judicial Review, Human Rights
The applicant had been sentenced to detention during Her Majesty's Pleasure. He sought a judicial review of the Lord Chief Justice's recommendation to the Home Secretary for the minimum term he was to serve. Held: In exercising this function, the LCJ was acting in a judicial capacity, and therefore his recommendation was not subject to judicial review. "Article 6.1 may require an appellate court conducting an appeal against a sentence to afford the appellant an oral hearing, and perhaps occasionally to give or lead evidence at that hearing, if on the facts of his case and the issues arising in it such a step is necessary to ensure that the procedure is fair." In this case it was not. The Lord Chief Justice had been under no obligation to afford the appellant an oral hearing and, alternatively, that, if he was entitled to an oral hearing, he had waived that entitlement. The Lord Chief Justice had paid due regard to the appellant's welfare.
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 53(1) - European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Nelson, Re Reference By Her Majesty's Attorney General (No 4 of 2003) [2003] NICA 49
25 Nov 2003
CANI

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Flowers, Graver and Cunningham, Smith and Bradley; Attorney General's references No 114 of 2002, 115 of 2002 116 of 2002, 144 of 2002, 145 of 202 [2003] EWCA Crim 3374
26 Nov 2003
CACD
Mr Justice Leveson Lord Justice Rose Mr Justice Tugendhat
Criminal Sentencing

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Neal, Hood [2003] EWCA Crim 3449
28 Nov 2003
CACD
Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Cresswell Mr Justice Jack
Criminal Sentencing, Customs and Excise
The defendants appealed sentence for having been involved in the large scale importation of cigarettes evading customs duty. Held: The judge had paid proper attention to Dosanjh. Having regard also to Czyzewski, the sentences were within the guidelines and the appeal was refused.
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(2)
1 Cites


 
Regina v Stevens (Danny) Times, 04 December 2003
1 Dec 2003
CACD
Kennedy LJ, Curtis, Forbes JJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant appealed the imposition of a consecutive sentence to follow a mandatory life sentence. He was subject to a suspended sentence when he committed the offences for which he received the life sentence, and had been given a consecutive two year sentence. Held: It is normally appropriate to make an activated suspended sentence run consecutively, but not where the sentence to be followed was a mandatory life sentence.
Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 60(1)
1 Cites


 
Young v Regina [2003] EWCA Crim 3481; [2004] 2 All ER 63; Times, 08 December 2003; [2004] 1 WLR 1587
4 Dec 2003
CACD
Lord Justice May Mr Justice Roderick Evans His Honour Judge Roberts Qc
Criminal Sentencing
The appellant had been convicted of VAT fraud. His company collected sums for charity but hid substantial receipts. He appealed his sentence on the grounds of disparity with his co-defendants. The fraud was substantial and organised. Held: The sentence on this defendant was not disproportionate (applying the test in Fawcett). Indeed, the problem was not the severity of this sentence bur rather the lower sentences imposed on his co-defendants. Appeal dismissed.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
I R, Regina (on the Application Of) v Shetty and Another [2003] EWHC 3152 (Admin)
12 Dec 2003
Admn

Health, Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Brown v Inner London Crown Court [2003] EWHC 3194 (Admin)
15 Dec 2003
Admn

Criminal Sentencing

Football Spectators Act 1989 14A
[ Bailii ]
 
Lomas v Parle [2003] EWCA Civ 1804; Times, 13 January 2004; [2004] 1 All ER 1173; [2004] 1 FLR 812
18 Dec 2003
CA
The President Of The Family Division Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Mance
Contempt of Court, Family, Criminal Sentencing
The respondent had been sentenced to two months imprisonment for breaches of orders under the Act. The wife appealed, seeking to increase the sentence. The maximum sentence was two years. Held: The court had to consider such cases in the light of any parallel criminal or civil proceedings under the 1997 Act. "This was a case with an appalling history of intimidation and abuse. At every turn the husband had flouted the orders of the court and seized any leniency as little more than an opportunity to resume his campaign against the wife. The two breaches in respect of which he was sentenced were both individually extremely sinister in their presentation and implication. We are of the opinion that a sentence of less than ten months' imprisonment would have been unduly lenient. We only fixed a lesser sentence to reflect the element of double jeopardy. Accordingly the sentence which we passed on 30 October was a sentence of eight months' imprisonment concurrent on each of the admitted breaches. " and "the first court to sentence must not anticipate or allow for a likely future sentence. It is for the second court to sentence to reflect the prior sentence in its judgment in order to ensure that the defendant is not twice punished for the same act. It is essential that the second court should be fully informed of the factors and circumstances reflected in the first sentence."
Family Law Act 1996 42 - Contempt of Court Act 1981 14 - Protection from Harrassment Act 1997
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.