Attorney-General’s Reference No 32 of 1996, Regina v Whittaker: CACD 1997

The Court described the circumstances under which a life sentence of imprisonment can be imposed: ‘It appears to this Court that the conditions may be put under two heads. The first is that the offender should have been convicted of a very serious offence. If he (or she) has not, then there can be no question of imposing a life sentence. But the second condition is that there should be good grounds for believing that the offender may remain a serious danger to the public for a period which cannot be reliably estimated at the date of sentence. By ‘serious danger’ the Court has in mind particularly serious offences of violence and serious offences of a sexual nature. The grounds which may found such a belief will often relate to the mental condition of the offender.’ and ‘It is therefore plain that evidence of an offender’s mental state is often highly relevant. But the crucial question is whether on all the facts it appears an offender is likely to represent a serious danger to the public for an indeterminate time.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham CJ

Citations:

[1997] 1 Cr App R(S) 261

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Willoughby CACD 5-Nov-1998
Appeal against conviction dismissed. Appeal against sentence for offences of false imprisonment, indecent assault and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The sentences were life imprisonment for the offence of false imprisonment, with . .
ApprovedRegina v Chapman CACD 22-Jul-1999
A discretionary life sentence intended to protect the public could now only be imposed after establishing compliance with the Act in that the sentence was so serious as to deserve a very long sentence, and for an unforeseeable time into the future, . .
CitedSturnham, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board of England and Wales and Another (No 2) SC 3-Jul-2013
From 4 April 2005 until 3 December 2012, English law provided for the imposition of sentences of imprisonment for public protection (‘IPP’). The Court addressed the practical and legal issues resulting from the new system.
Held: The decision . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.220556