The court gave its reasons for allowing an appeal by the defendant as to the time to be held to go towards service of his sentence of imprisonment after had had spent time before sentence subject to curfew.
The sentence, imposed on 13 December 2012, was twelve months imprisonment. The judge had intended that the appellant should receive credit under section 204A but erroneously thought that the credit would be given administratively. The papers were not put before him until after the 56 day period for administrative correction under section 155 of the 2000 Act had expired. It followed that an application for leave to appeal was made out of time. Time was extended, leave was granted and 47 days were ordered to count against the appellant’s sentence.
Judges:
Hughes LJ VP, Sweeney J
Citations:
[2013] EWCA Crim 1024, [2014] 1 Cr App R(S) 42
Links:
Statutes:
Powers of the Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 155
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
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: 10 September 2022; Ref: scu.510943
