The court considered the interaction of sections 240 of the 2003 Act, and 67 of the 1967 Act as applied to time spent on remand.
Held: The court laying down the sentence should address this issue, and declare whether all time or otherwise spent on remand should count against the sentence. If there was any administrative error in counting the days spent, that could be corrected later. Under section 240 time could not count unless an express order was made.
Sir Igor Judge P said: ‘the imperative is that no prisoner should be detained for a day longer than the period justified by the sentence of the court’.
Judges:
Sir Igor Judge P, Treacy J, Sir Michael Wright
Citations:
[2007] EWCA Crim 165, Times 13-Feb-2007, [2007] 2 All ER 768, [2007] 1 WLR 2117, [2007] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 66, [2007] Crim LR 402
Links:
Statutes:
Criminal Justice Act 1967 67, Criminal Justice Act 2003 240
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Norman and Others, Regina v CACD 20-Jul-2006
The defendant said that the judge in setting his sentence had failed correctly to identify the time he had spent in custody awaiting trial, and which would act as time served.
Held: The defendants were entitled to a direction. If the time for . .
Cited – Regina v Annesley CACD 1976
The court has a common law power to defer part of its sentencing process. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Reynolds and Others, Regina v CACD 8-Mar-2007
The court considered how it could marry the law against the increase of penaties on appeal with the possible need to correct a judge’s error in sentencing. It summarised the provisions for sentencing for specified offences: ‘[The] regime requires . .
Cited – Sherry v The Queen PC 4-Mar-2013
Discretion as to credit for remand time
(Guernsey) In 1980 the appellant had been sentenced to three months imprisonment. He had spent 10 days on remand, but no allowance was given for that time. He gave notice of appeal, but after being released on open remand, he failed to appear at his . .
Cited – Leacock and Others, Regina v CACD 12-Nov-2013
The defendants sought leave to appeal against their sentences, saying that the time served calculations had not included time spent subject to curfew and otherwise.
Held: ‘if a prisoner is serving a sentence for another offence at the time on . .
Cited – Thorsby and Others v Regina CACD 20-Jan-2015
These several applications raised a single ground of appeal namely that the sentencing court failed to give credit under section 240A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, as amended, for one half of the time spent by the offender on qualifying curfew . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.248846
