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: 2001 To: 2001

This page lists 77 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.

 
Regina v Harrison [2001] 1 Cr App R (S) 107
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

1 Citers


 
Regina v Bol Joseph [2001] 2 Cr App R(S) 398
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The court upheld a sentence of three years detention imposed under section 91(3) of the 2000 Act on a 14 year old boy who had with others attempted to rob a man of his computer and his wallet. The offence was late at night, the appellant produced a knife with a four inch blade, and he was the one who had taken the prime role. Furthermore, although young, he was larger than his victim.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Gordon and Foster [2001] 1 Cr App R(S) 200
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

1 Citers


 
Regina v Dorrian [2001] Cr App R (S) 477
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The court retains a common law power to defer part of its sentencing procedure.
1 Citers


 
Attorney General's Reference No 28 of 2001 (McCollins) [2001] EWCA Crim 1373
2001
CACD
Judge LJ
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant admitted four street robberies. One involved punching the victim in the face. Two involved threats with a knife, and one a threat to shoot. All save the first were committed on bail. A DTTO (Drug Treatment and Testing Order) was made. Held: "The proper approach to this case is, in our judgment, clear. The sentence for these four offences committed by this offender were unduly lenient. We recognise, of course, the importance of rehabilitation and reintegration, particularly where the offender is young and the opportunity to achieve rehabilitation may not readily return, and where the offender is already addicted to drugs, which problem unless addressed is likely to continue. That said, however, we do not consider that the Drug Treatment and Testing Order was an appropriate sentence in this case. We can summarise our reason in a single sentence. It gave excessive weight to the issue of rehabilitation and wholly insufficient weight to the actual criminality of the offender."
1 Citers


 
Attorney-General's Reference No 88 of 2000 [2001] EWCA Crim 68
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The Attorney General referred a sentence for inflicting grievous bodily harm in a 'road rage' situation. Held: The section 18 offence should have attracted a sentence of four years after a trial.
Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 818
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Ong [2001] 1 Cr App R(S) 404
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The defendant sought leave to appeal against sentence of four years for conspitracy to cause a public nuisance having pleaded guilty. He had planned to turn off the floodlights at a Premier Division football match between Charlton Athletic and Liverpool in order to make a fraudulent gain for a group of Far Eastern bookmakers. The plan, if implemented, would have plunged those attending the match, a crowd of many thousands, into darkness, and prevented them seeing the match they had paid to see. Held: Leave was refused.
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Hasguler; CACD 2001 - [2001] 1 Cr App R(S) 36
 
Regina v Graham (S) [2001] 1 Cr App R(S) 335
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The court construed section 58 of the 1998 Act, looking at the requirement for a sex offender to register under section 1 of the Sexual Offenders Act 1997. The length of the registration obligation is determined by the length of the term of imprisonment to which the offender is sentenced. Held: "It is to be noted that although the word 'custodial' is used in relation to subparagraph (b) . . this does not necessarily imply a period of imprisonment. It merely denotes a period during which an offender is liable to be imprisoned if he is discovered to be in breach of the licence.
That must be compared with section 1 of the Sex Offenders Act 1997, which sets outs in tabular form the applicable period for which any person convicted of a sexual case is required to register and to notify the appropriate authorities. In relation to the sentence of imprisonment which is passed, the appropriate wording of the table is:
'A person who, in the respect of the offence, is or has been sentenced to imprisonment for a term of more than six months, but less than 30 months.' We note the difference between the phrase 'custodial sentence' and the phrase a 'term of imprisonment'. It seems to us that on the plain construction of the latter the term of imprisonment denotes actual and immediate imprisonment and does not include a sentence of extended licence during which he is liable to be imprisoned, but not necessarily be so."
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 58 - Sexual Offenders Act 1997 1
1 Citers


 
Attorney General's Reference Nos 86 and 87 of 1999 [2001] 1 Cr App R (S) 141
2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The Court considered authorities in relation to prosecution appeals against a sentence imposed by the judge where that judge had given an indication of the likely sentence: '. . we consider that where an indication is given by a trial judge as to the level of sentencing and that indication is one which prosecuting counsel considers to be inappropriate, or would have considered to be inappropriate if he or she had applied his mind to it, prosecuting counsel should register dissent and should invite the attention of the Court to any relevant authorities as indicated by the Lord Chief Justice in the case of Thompson and Rogers, otherwise if the offender does act to his detriment on the indication which has been given this Court may well find it difficult to intervene in response to a reference made by the Attorney-General.' Where an indication is given by a trial judge as to the level of sentencing and that indication is one which prosecuting counsel considers to be inappropriate, or would have considered to be inappropriate if he had applied his mind to it, he should invite the attention of the Court to any relevant authorities.
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Gatehouse; CACD 2001 - [2001] EWCA Crim 459

 
 Attorney General's Reference (No 70 of 2001) Re; sub nom Regina v Hardy; CACD 2001 - [2001] EWCA Crim 2446

 
 Regina v Maxwell-King; CACD 2-Jan-2001 - Times, 02 January 2001; Gazette, 25 January 2001
 
Regina v Frost Times, 08 January 2001
8 Jan 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
When a court was considering whether exceptional circumstances might exist which would justify not imposing an automatic life sentence on a second conviction for a serious offence of violence, the court was entitled to take into account an anomaly regarding the status of the previous conviction. There was no requirement when the considering whether such exceptional circumstances existed, to be sure that the defendant did not pose any significant risk. The exceptional circumstances existed independently of the existence of such a risk.


 
 Regina v Mitchell (Clive), Regina v Mitchell (Jennifer); CACD 9-Jan-2001 - Times, 09 January 2001

 
 Regina v Hayward; CACD 9-Jan-2001 - Times, 09 January 2001; Gazette, 25 January 2001
 
Regina v Welsh Times, 09 January 2001
9 Jan 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
A mother was found guilty of the manslaughter of her partner. She was pregnant and had a young child. The court recognised and took heed of the fact that the sentence of imprisonment would separate the mother form her children, and in particular her baby when born and he or she reached eighteen months. The sentence was reduced, and the court expressed the hope that there would be no such separation, but the circumstances of the killing still required an immediate sentence of imprisonment.

 
Regina v Williams (Errol) Times, 11 January 2001
11 Jan 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
When a court decided that an offender had benefited from Drug trafficking, it had to first to calculate the amount of benefit to be recovered from the defendant. In making that assessment, the court had to look to the assumptions in the section. The court should not use other assumptions unless there was evidence before the court to a civil standard on which any such assumption could be based. In this case, the calculation had been reduced to reflect the offenders means, but it left him open to possible later action to recover the excess.
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 2 4 5


 
 Regina v Wakefield; Regina v Lancashire; CACD 12-Jan-2001 - Times, 12 January 2001
 
Regina v Nelmes Times, 06 February 2001
6 Feb 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
Where there had been an attempted abduction of a child, there was little existing guidance on the proper sentencing. The abduction did not last long and the child was not apparently disturbed. The mother remained distressed. A sentence of three years imprisonment was too long, but to years remained appropriate.
Child Abduction Act 1984 2

 
Regina v Bevis Times, 08 February 2001
8 Feb 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing, Insolvency
A distinction has to be made in between sections 208 and 213 of the Act. Section 208 implies an element of dishonesty, rather than an intent to defraud. The difference lay in the absence of a requirement to establish that the defendant to intended to benefit himself. Though his offence was not technical, and it struck at a lot of company law and the winding up and liquidation processes, it was distinct from fraudulent trading. A custodial sentence was proper, but his previous good character suggested a reduced sentence of nine months imprisonment and a reduction in disqualification to two years.
Insolvency Act 1986

 
Regina v Saunders; Regina v Hockings; Regina v Williams Times, 20 February 2001
20 Feb 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing, Road Traffic
Where an employee commits an offence under the tachograph regulations by making false entries, such an offence should not be taken less serious than the same offence committed by an employer. Employees were likely also to be driven by financial motives, and the danger was the danger faced by other road users faced by tired drivers. Sentences of imprisonment were not inappropriate for such offences even by first time offender employees.
Transport Act 1968 99(5)

 
Allen v West Yorkshire Probation Service Times, 20 February 2001
20 Feb 2001
QBD

Judicial Review, Criminal Sentencing
Where a defendant felt that a sentence imposed by magistrates was wrong, he should take the issue to the Crown Court by way of appeal. It was wrong to try to deal with it by way of judicial review or appeal by way of case stated. As much as anything else the greater delay would lead to additional difficulties in carrying out any sentence.


 
 Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Cummings; CA 22-Feb-2001 - Times, 27 February 2001; Gazette, 01 March 2001; [2001] EWCA Civ 45
 
Greenfield v Secretary of State for Home Department Times, 06 March 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 129; [2001] 1 WLR 1731
22 Feb 2001
Admn

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Prisons, Human Rights
Disciplinary proceedings within a prison were not criminal charges so as to bring into play the provisions of the Human Rights Act, even though they could result in an extension of the time which would be served by the prisoner. Such proceedings would not carry with them the stigma of a full criminal conviction, and it is necessary to ensure consistency throughout the convention countries as to the application of article 6.1. The risk of serving additional days followed from the original deprivation of liberty.
Criminal Justice Act 1991 42(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Akhtar Times, 23 February 2001
23 Feb 2001
QBD

Criminal Sentencing
The defendant committed an offence whilst released on licence. She was sentenced by the magistrates for the offence and ordered to be recalled to serve a month for the offence committed whilst on licence. The Secretary received a probation report and revoke her licence entirely. Held: The fact that the magistrates had carried out a sentencing procedure did not prevent the Secretary of State carrying out a different exercise. He was not subject to the same requirement to act proportionately to the offence on licence.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 116 - Criminal Justice Act 1991 39

 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anderson Same v Same, ex parte Taylor Times, 27 February 2001; Gazette, 20 April 2001
27 Feb 2001
QBD

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
When the Home Secretary set a tariff sentence for a mandatory life sentence prisoner, in order to satisfy the requirement for retribution and deterrence, that exercise was not a judicial sentencing exercise to which the provisions of the Human Rights legislation applied. The issues he considered were wider than those involved in the strict sentencing process.
European Convention on Human Rights Art 6.1
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Alden; Regina v Wright Times, 27 February 2001
27 Feb 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
The human rights legislation, and in particular article 7, implied nothing to change the basis of sentencing for the offence of buggery. The defendants could not assert that the levels of sentencing had increased between the time when the offences had taken place and the time when they were sentenced. R v Willis remained good guidance.

 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Ex Parte Bulger Times, 07 March 2001; [2001] 3 All E R 449
7 Mar 2001
QBD

Criminal Sentencing, Judicial Review
The family of a murder victim has no standing to intervene to challenge the tariff set for the sentence to be served by the youths convicted of the murder. They had been invited to state the impact of their son's death, but not the sentence to be served. Although the standing required for judicial review was now generally lower, the fact of having made representations did not give them any such standing. When fixing the tariff of sentence to be served by a youth, the court must look on each occasion also at questions of rehabilitation.
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 44 - Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 82A
1 Citers


 
Regina (Hirst) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 22 March 2001; Gazette, 03 May 2001; [2001] Prison Law Reports 147; [2001] EWCA Civ 378
8 Mar 2001
CA
Lord Woolf C.J
Judicial Review, Criminal Sentencing, Prisons
The prisoner had been re-categorised and transferred to a higher category prison. Held: A life sentence serving prisoner, who had served the tariff period, and was moving into the period of discretionary detention, was entitled to be informed of a change of his category, and the reasons for it, and be given opportunity to make representations about it. This would not prevent a move for operational reasons not involving such a change in category. Such a change of category would significantly affect his chances of release. Lord Woolf: "I have found the question of what should be the outcome of this appeal by no means easy to determine. I accept the importance of the prison service being able to make decisions which are operationally important without having to go through the technical requirements of providing opportunities for making representations. However, the rules of fairness and natural justice are flexible and not static; they are capable of developing not only in relation to the expectations of contemporary society, but also to meet proper operational requirements. The ability of the prison service to meet both their operational needs and the needs for prisoners to be treated fairly can usually be achieved within the panoply of the requirements of fairness. On the whole, the courts will require considerable persuasion that administrative convenience justifies a departure from the principles of fairness which would otherwise be appropriate in a particular situation. However, the arguments which are advanced by the Home Office in this case, as I understand them, are not only ones of administrative convenience. They refer to operational difficulties and operational problems which could undermine the security and discipline within the prison system.
It seems to me basic that a decision which is as important as the present decision to Mr Hirst should not be taken without giving him the opportunity to make representations and to have the matter properly considered as a consequence of his so doing. I think that there is some substance, but would not overvalue it, in the problem referred to by Lord Justice Simon Brown which arise in reconsidering a decision [paragraph 58 above]. However, regardless of that difficulty, it seems to me that a decision of this nature as a matter of fairness should not be taken until Mr Hirst had been fully involved. He should have been given a reasonable period to make representations before the decision was taken. He should have been given that opportunity after he had been told the grounds upon which it was appropriate to recategorise him.'"
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Keith Ross [2001] 2 Cr App R (S) 109; [2001] EWCA Crim 560
13 Mar 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Stanley Burnton And The Recorder Of Manchester
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant having pleaded guilty to a serious drugs offence now appealed a confiscation order. He claimed that he had been misled that the prosecution would not request an inquiry for this purpose, and during the course of the hearing the prosecution changed its mind, and that the defendant having been sentences the section no longer allowed such an inquiry, unless the judge had explicitly postponed the decision. Held: The Act required a clear indication from the judge that this was his intention. Appeal allowed.
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 2
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Langstone; CACD 14-Mar-2001 - Times, 14 March 2001
 
Regina v McKendry Times, 16 March 2001
16 Mar 2001
CMAC

Criminal Sentencing, Armed Forces
The circumstances of the different armed services would differ considerably from each other in the seriousness of the effect of being absent without leave. Accordingly, it was not appropriate to seek to impose on the different services a requirement that they should act on a standard basis. The court felt it would be entirely improper to seek to impose such a common standard.

 
Abbas Kassimali Gokal v Serious Fraud Office [2001] EWCA Civ 368
16 Mar 2001
CA
Lord Justice Simon Brown Lord Justice Robert Walker And Lord Justice Keene
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant was convicted of an offence to which section 15 of the Theft Act did not apply. It involved a deception of the auditors of BCCI in concealing a number of substantial loans made to a group of companies run by the defendant. Buxton J had considered that Rees was confined to its own facts and to an offence under section 15 of the Theft Act. He held that the phrase "if he obtains" in section 71(4) of the 1988 Act imports an obtaining by the defendant himself.
Proceeds of Crime Act 1995
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Moss Times, 03 April 2001
3 Apr 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The court's ability to make an order under the Act required that order to be made before the principle sentence was handed down. Once that had happened it was too late to make an order. Here the prosecution had not at first sought an order, and when it came to do so, the judge had already reached, but not announced, his sentencing decision. The judge proceeded with the sentence. The section laid down a clear and mandatory sequence to be followed.
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 2 3


 
 Regina (Pearson Martinez and Hirst) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Others; Hirst v Attorney-General; QBD 17-Apr-2001 - Times, 17 April 2001; Gazette, 07 June 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 239
 
Regina v Chen (Siao Bing) and Others Times, 17 April 2001
17 Apr 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
A foreign national, when sentenced, was made subject to an order that he be deported on completing his sentence. The defendants appealed saying that the term of imprisonment should reflect that the fat that they would be returned to a regime of which they had good cause to fear. The court rejected this, saying that if, at the end of the sentence the defendant was in proper fear of the consequences of being returned, procedures existed to make application to the Home Office. They also asked that the court should make allowance for the fact that they would be serving the sentence in an environment which was foreign to them. The court felt this to be minor consideration which could not displace the need shown here for a deterrent sentence.

 
Regina v Parole Board, ex parte MacNeil Times, 18 April 2001; [2001] EWCA Civ 448
18 Apr 2001
CA
Peter Gibson LJ, Lord Phillips MR
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
The interval between occasions of consideration of the granting of parole to a discretionary life prisoner, was to be determined on the facts and circumstances of each prisoner. There was no rule that the maximum period between reviews was to be two years. The earlier case had expressly stated that no maximum interval was being set. Gibson LJ "The difficulty . . . in relying on Oldham is that the European Court expressly stated . . . that it was not going to give a ruling as to the maximum permissible period between reviews to consider a prisoner's release. It recognised that a "reasonable period" will depend on the facts of the particular case. . . . The fact that two years constituted too long a period in Oldham does not necessarily entail that a two-year period in the present case was disproportionately long." Lord Phillips MR: "This is a case which has turned upon its particular facts, as the Strasbourg court has recognised is appropriate. No general proposition can be based upon it to the effect that a two year interval will satisfy the requirement derived from Article 5 (4) of the Human Rights Convention that a person deprived of his liberty shall be entitled to have the lawfulness of his detention reviewed at reasonable intervals."
European Convention on Human Rights 5.4
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Lichniak; Regina v Pyrah; CACD 2-May-2001 - Times, 16 May 2001; Gazette, 14 June 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 294; [2001] 3 WLR 933; [2002] QB 296

 
 Regina v Everleigh; CACD 16-May-2001 - Times, 16 May 2001; [2002] Cr App R (S) 32
 
Regina (Mcneil) v Parole Board Gazette, 17 May 2001
17 May 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
The interval between occasions of consideration of the granting of parole to a discretionary life prisoner, was to be determined on the facts and circumstances of each prisoner. There was no rule that the maximum period between reviews was to be two years. The earlier case had expressly stated that no maximum interval was being set.
European Convention on Human Rights 5.4

 
Regina (P) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Regina (Q) v Same Times, 01 June 2001; Gazette, 21 June 2001; [2001] 3 FCR 416; [2001] FLR 1122
1 Jun 2001
QBD

Administrative, Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing
The Prison Service's policy of refusing to allow children over the age of eighteen months to stay with their mother in prison was lawful. The impairment of family life was an inevitable and inherent part of the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment. The policy was to designed allow for the protection of children's interests so far as possible. The use of a fixed age allowed proper preparation, and consistency of facilities, and there was nothing in the policy to prevent consideration of the individual circumstances in particular cases. There were arguments both for lowering the age so as to minimise the damage by occasioning it when the bond between mother and child was less, and otherwise.
Prison Rules 1999 (1999 No 728) - Children Act 1989 1 - Prison Act 1952
1 Citers


 
Regina v Webbe etc Times, 13 June 2001
13 Jun 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The court issued new guidelines for sentencing offenders for offences of handling stolen goods in the light of advice from the Sentencing Advisory Panel. The court should take into account many factors including, advance knowledge of the theft, and if known about, the seriousness of that offence, the willingness to receive the proceeds of the theft. Where the replacement value was less than £10,000 the offence should normally be tried summarily, but that was not the sole factor. Aggravating factors include, closeness to the theft, high or sentimental values to the loser, derivation from domestic burglaries, sophistication, high levels of profit, the provision of a regular outlet. Mitigations include low values, one off offences.
Theft Act 1968

 
Regina v Eskdale Times, 21 June 2001; [2001] EWCA Crim 1159; [2002] 1 Cr App R(S) 118
21 Jun 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The defendant had made some 1000 obscene and threatening telephone calls to women over a two week period. Whilst not mentally ill, the probation report indicated that he was a serious risk to the public, and he was suffering profound problems of sexual deviancy. The sentence of nine years for public nuisance was very severe but was not so manifestly excessive as to require it to be reduced on appeal.
1 Citers



 
 Regina (Inner London Probation Service) v Tower Bridge Magistrates' Court; QBD 26-Jun-2001 - Times, 26 June 2001; [2002] Cr App R(S) 43
 
Attorney General for Northern Ireland Reference No 3 of 2000 [2001] NIECA 25
28 Jun 2001
CANI

Criminal Sentencing

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Wild; Regina v Jefferson Times, 04 July 2001
4 Jul 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The court set down the matters to be considered when sentencing for the downloading of pornographic images of children from the Internet or otherwise, and in particular where lay the custody threshold. The further distribution of images was a severely aggravating factor, as could be the degree of obscenity the age and number of children involved, and quality of the images involved. Those acquiring such images did not have direct responsibility for corruption but did have indirect responsibility. Without the desire to acquire such images, there would be no distribution, and less corruption of children. In neither of these cases, however was the custody threshold reached.
Protection of Children Act 1978 1(1)(a)


 
 Phillips v United Kingdom; ECHR 5-Jul-2001 - Times, 13 August 2001; 41087/98; [2001] Crim LR 817; [2001] ECHR 437; (2001) 11 BHRC 280
 
Regina v Frank Adam Moran (Attorney General's Reference No 25 of 2001) Times, 08 August 2001; Gazette, 27 September 2001; [2001] EWCA Crim 1770; [2002] 1 WLR 253
27 Jul 2001
CACD
Mantell LJ, Rougier LJ, Grigson J
Taxes Management, Criminal Sentencing
The defendant pleaded guilty to making false statements, and cheating the public revenue by understating his profits as a market trader over a protracted period. The judge made a confiscation order equal to the amount of undeclared profit. On appeal, that element was set aside. The section referred to the pecuniary advantage obtained by the cheating. The undeclared profit was not earned as a result of the cheating, but in the normal course of trade. The pecuniary advantage was the amount of underpayment of tax, with interest accrued or investment return on that sum. Neither could the later section be used to treat properly earned sums as a pecuniary advantage.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 71(5) 102(5)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Tennyson, In the Matter of (29) [2001] NIECA 29
31 Jul 2001
CANI

Criminal Sentencing
Application for leave to appeal against sentences
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Bediako; Regina v Martin Times, 12 September 2001
30 Aug 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
The sentences for kidnapping and other violence in the context of other drug related crime must reflect the prevalence and extreme danger of the offence, and long sentences are appropriate. Existing sentencing guidelines did not reflect these new contexts.

 
William Scott Ellis v Her Majesty's Advocate [2001] ScotHC 98
31 Aug 2001
HCJ
Lady Cosgrove and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Osborne
Scotland, Criminal Sentencing, Scotland
The defendant appealed cumulative sentences of nine years in respect of repeated and serious assaults and other offences against his wife, and daughter Giving full weight to his personal circumstances, it was quite impossible to say that the sentence of nine years was excessive. Had it not been for those circumstances, a more severe sentence would have been merited.
[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]

 
 Regina v Gaynor; CANI 14-Sep-2001 - [2001] NIECA 30
 
Regina v Gleeson Times, 30 October 2001; [2001] EWCA Crim 2023; [2002] 1 Cr App R (S) 485
3 Oct 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Rose, Mr Justice Butterfield, Mr Justice Cooke
Criminal Sentencing, Intellectual Property
The Court of Appeal should not tinker with sentences passed by lower courts in the absence of exceptional circumstances, or where they were wrong in principle, or were manifestly excessive. Here a sentence of 30 months for a professional and systematic breach of Trade Mark law was not to be set aside. The sentence was intended to act as a deterrence. The potential loss to the music industry relevant to the case was a substantial factor.
Trade Marks Act 1994 92
1 Citers


 
Attorney General's Reference No 76 of 2001 (Jason Halliley) [2001] EWCA Crim 2021
3 Oct 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Dearman, Southgate; CACD 8-Oct-2001 - Unrepported, 8 October 2001
 
Brown, Regina v [2001] EWCA Crim 2108
9 Oct 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing
Appeal from sentence of 18 months imprisonment for causing death by dangerous driving
[ Bailii ]
 
Osmani v The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 50841/99
11 Oct 2001
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing
The applicant, a mayor, organised an armed vigil to protect the Albanian flag in defiance of an order of the Constitutional Court. He made a speech fomenting interethnic violence. Weapons were found in the town hall and there was a riot involving about 200 people during which police officers were injured. Held: The original sentence of seven years' imprisonment was severe but, as a result of an amnesty he served 15 months in prison, but that could not be considered disproportionate: "The above circumstances lead the Court to conclude that the present case is different from Osmani and Others because the protesters' conduct, although involving a certain degree of disturbance and causing some damage, did not amount to violence. It is therefore closer on the facts to Steel and Others, Drieman and Others, Lucas and Barraco.
The exceptional severity of the sanction, however, distinguishes the present case from the cases of Steel and Others, Drieman and Others, Lucas and Barraco, where the measures taken against the applicants in comparable circumstances were considered to be justified by the demands of public order. Indeed, in none of those cases was the sentence longer than a few days' imprisonment without remission, except in one case Barraco) where it amounted to a suspended sentence of three months' imprisonment which was not, in the end, served. The court accordingly considers that the circumstances of the instant case present no justification for being remanded in custody for a year and for the sentence of three years' imprisonment, suspended for three years.
The Court therefore concludes that, although a sanction for the applicant's actions might have been warranted by the demands of public order, the lengthy period of detention pending trial and the long suspended prison sentence imposed on her were not proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. The court considers that the unusually severe sanction imposed in the present case must have had a chilling effect on the applicant and other persons taking part in protest actions
1 Citers


 
Practice Direction (Crime: Victim personal statements) Times, 06 November 2001
16 Oct 2001
CACD
Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice
Criminal Sentencing
Victims of crime are now given particular opportunity to say how the crime has effected them personally. Courts should, when sentencing, take a properly formed statement and any supporting evidence into account. The court must pass a sentence having regard to the offence and of the offender taking into account, so far as appropriate, the consequences to the victim. The victim's opinions as to sentence, as opposed to its consequences, were not relevant. Victims should be advised of that. If opinions as to sentence were included in a statement, the court should pay no attention to them.
Criminal Justice Act 1967 9


 
 Regina v G (Offences against children); CACD 18-Oct-2001 - Times, 12 November 2001
 
Regina (SR) v Nottingham Magistrates' Court [2001] EWHC Admin 802
19 Oct 2001
QBD
Lord Justice Brooke, Mr Justice Newman
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Children, Discrimination
The applicant SR, aged 15, was remanded in custody to a Youth Offenders Institution pending sentence. Had he been a girl, he could not have been so remanded, since no similar provision was available for them. He complained that the law infringed his human rights. It was accepted that he was properly dealt with under the rules. For Art 14, a difference is discriminatory if it 'has no objective and reasonable justification', that is, it pursues no 'legitimate aim' or if there is no 'reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means and the aim to be realised'. The court refused the declaration of incompatibility requested, but ordered that the committal to custody had been wrong.
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 98 - European Convention on Human Rights art 14
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Barber Times, 20 November 2001
24 Oct 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Rose, Mr Justice Davis and Sir Richard Tucker
Criminal Sentencing
It is vital that those who plead guilty at the earliest opportunity should be given appropriate credit. For an offence triable only on indictment, that opportunity would not arise until the Crown Court, but the discount should then be as much as a third. In an either way offence, where the defendant indicated a guilty plea before venue was decided, the discount might be more than one third.
1 Cites


 
Regina v Everson [2002] 1 Cr App R (S) 132; [2001] EWCA Crim 2262
24 Oct 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Nelson Times, 10 December 2001; [2002] 1 Cr App R (S) 565
24 Oct 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Rose, Mr Justice Davis and Sir Richard Tucker
Criminal Sentencing
The court gave guidelines on sentencing violent or sex offenders. The court should consider in order the commensurate sentence, whether any longer sentence was needed to protect the public, and if the sentence would be four year or longer, whether an extended sentence would be adequate to prevent further sentencing whether through rehabilitation or otherwise. Courts should not be deterred from implementing the legislative provisions by their complexity, and apparent conundrums were more imaginary than real. As to extended sentences, a longer sentence may sometimes be required for the purposes of treatment than would be appropriate for the offence.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina (Anderson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (Taylor) v Same Times, 16 November 2001; Gazette, 06 December 2001; [2001] EWCA Civ 1698
13 Nov 2001
CA
Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Simon Brown and Lord Justice Buxton
Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing
The applicants had been convicted of murder. The Home Secretary had to fix sentence tariffs for their release. They contended that it was a breach of their rights for that tariff to be set by a politician. The distinction was made between offences carrying mandatory and discretionary life sentences. The decision as to what measure of deterrence was required was not solely a matter suitable for decisions by the courts, but included elements to be considered which looked to wider issues. The exercise of such powers with respect to discretionary lifers had been ruled unlawful. The legislation, following that decision, explicitly excluded tariffs for mandatory lifers, and it was not for the courts to set aside such decisions. The present system might not survive challenge in the Court of Human Rights, but it must be their decision
Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 29
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (Wirral Health Authority and Another) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and Another Times, 26 November 2001; Gazette, 10 January 2002; [2001] EWCA Civ 1901
13 Nov 2001
CA
Lord Justice Clarke, Lord Justice Mance and Lord Justice Dyson
Health, Criminal Sentencing
The applicant had been detained under the Act. His detention had been ended by the Mental Health Tribunal, but he had been detained again under s3. The decision was later quashed, and he asserted that upon that decision, an earlier sentence of imprisonment took effect, preventing his re-detention. The Tribunal's detention was later quashed. Held: Where an inferior tribunal's decision was unlawful, the High Court could quash it. the effect of quashing the decision was that the tribunal had never made the decision to discharge.
Mental Health Act 1983 37, 3
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Yorkshire Water Services Ltd Times, 12 December 2001
16 Nov 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Mance and Mr Justice Rougier
Environment, Criminal Sentencing
The defendant company was sentenced for supplying water which was below standard. The fine imposed was calculated according to the number of consumers affected. Held: When considering the level of fine, the court should look to, the degree of culpability; damage caused; the previous record; the need for balance between censure and any counter-productive effect, in the light of efforts to remedy the situation; the acts of the water authority after the events in question. The number of complainants should not be used as a multiplier.
Water Industry Act 1991 70(1)
1 Cites


 
S, Regina v [2001] EWCA Crim 2638
19 Nov 2001
CACD
Waller LJ, Rougier, Stanley Burnton JJ
Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Atkins Times, 14 January 2002
28 Nov 2001
CACD
Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Gage and Mr Justice Thomas
Criminal Sentencing
Where an appeal court dealt with an appeal on sentence for a young offender, it was very helpful to have available a report from the institution at which he was held with regard to any progress made since his arrival. It is particularly important to have such a report when no pre-sentence report was available.


 
 Johannes, Regina v; CACD 5-Dec-2001 - [2001] EWCA Crim 2825; [2002] 2 Cr App R (S) 109
 
Regina v Brown and others [2001] EWCA Crim 2761
7 Dec 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Mantell, Mr Justice Grigson, And, His Honour Judge Zucker Qc
Criminal Sentencing
The appellants were accused of involvement in a large conspiracy to defraud the Customs of import duties on alcohol. The main conspirator had committed the offences whilst in prison for similar offences. The parties appealed sentence and the confiscation orders made against them. Held: The particular circumstances surrounding the sentence of the main conspirator made his sentence of 8 years (reduced from 9) not appropriate as a benchmark for the rest. Where there was an element of double jeopardy, that was to be allowed for. Where there had been a trial, it was for the judge himself to assess the degree of involvement of a defendant. Here, although the offence of conspiracy was a continuing one, for these purposes it took place when the agreement was first made. Accordingly the court had no power to make a confiscation order under laws which were put in place afterwards. In the absence of an order postponing the making of a confiscation order, the jurisdiction was lost.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 71

 
Regina v Brown and Others [2001] EWCA Crim 2761
7 Dec 2001
CACD

Criminal Sentencing

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
S, Regina v [2001] EWCA Crim 2888
11 Dec 2001
CACD
Sir Richard Tucker, Maddison HHJ
Criminal Sentencing

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Smith (David Cadnam) Times, 17 December 2001; Gazette, 14 February 2002; 2002] 2 Cr App R(S) 37; [2001] UKHL 68; [2002] 1 WLR 54; [2002] 1 All ER 366; [2001] All ER (D) 182; [2002] 2 Cr App R (S) 37; [2002] Crim LR 396
13 Dec 2001
HL
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nolan, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hutton and Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
Customs and Excise, Criminal Sentencing
Smith had bought a motor vessel, The Vertine, with £55,000 provided by his co-defendant, John Marriott. In the words of the judge when imposing sentence, the respondent allowed himself to be used as Marriott's ship owner and captain. The boat was used in April 1998 on a run to Heligoland to buy cigarettes and to smuggle them into this country without paying duty. On 8 May 1998 the respondent, Marriott and another man, David Russell, set sail once more for Heligoland. Two days later, on 10 May, they sailed The Vertine, laden with cigarettes, into the Humber estuary, past the customs houses at Immingham and Hull and so on for some 50 miles up the River Ouse until she reached Ocean Lock at the entrance to Goole. There is no customs house at this point. When the boat arrived at Goole, customs officers stopped and searched her. They found 1.25 million cigarettes on board. The excise duty payable on that quantity of cigarettes would have been £130,666.40. He was found guilty of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by evading the duty, even though he remained liable to pay it. Held: An importer of uncustomed goods, in this case cigarettes, who intends not to enter them for customs purposes and not pay any duty on them, derives a benefit under section 74 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 through not paying the required duty at the point of importation, where the goods are forfeited by HM Customs following importation, before their value can be realised by the importer. Having obtained a pecuniary advantage in the form and amount of the evaded duty and was therefore subject to a confiscation order up to the amount of his realisable assets accordingly.
Lord Rodger held that the later seizure of the cigarettes was like a case involving the subsequent loss of or damage to goods obtained in the course of a crime; such loss or damage would not affect the propriety of a confiscation order – consider for example the case of a burglar who hides the householder's goods in the open air so that they are ruined by the weather or stolen by someone else.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 81 - Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Drew Gazette, 21 February 2002
19 Dec 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Kennedy, Mr Justice Bell and Mr Justice Cooke
Criminal Sentencing, Health, Human Rights
Having once been convicted of grievous bodily harm, and later being convicted of wounding with intent, the defendant became subject to the mandatory sentence provisions. He appealed saying that since he suffered from a mental illness, that illness should be treated as an exceptional circumstance allowing the court to exercise a discretion, and that a denial of his right to be so treated infringed his human rights. Held: His condition had not left him in a position where he was not fit to plead, and therefore his mental condition should not affect sentence. As a lifer, he would receive appropriate medical treatment, and his human rights had not been infringed.
Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 2 - Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 109 - European Convention on Human Rights Art 3 5
1 Cites


 
Regina v Threapleton Times, 10 January 2002; [2001] EWCA Crim 2892; [2002] 2 Cr App R (S) 198
19 Dec 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Waller, Mr Justice Rougier and Mr Justice Stanley Burnton
Criminal Sentencing
The defendant was made subject to a confiscation order. He appealed on the basis that the court had left two alternatives versions to the jury, and that it should therefore, when making such an order, take the version most favourable to the defendant. Held: There was no such obligation. The rule in Efionayi applied only to a sentencing case strictu sensu. This is not such. The duty to make the assessment was placed on the Court, and in this context that meant the judge not the jury. He was therefore right to apply his own judgement.
Criminal Justice Act 1988
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Drew Times, 14 January 2002; [2001] EWCA Crim 2861; [2001] EWCA Crim 2930
19 Dec 2001
CACD
Lord Justice Kennedy, Mr Justice Bell and Mr Justice Cooke
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights
The appellant, a mentally disordered offender appealed the imposition of an automatic life sentence. He asserted that it was a breach of his human rights. Held: Although courts had repeatedly encouraged the use of orders under the Mental Health Act, parliament had made its wishes clear, and such an order would provide greater protection for the public. The assumption under which he was detained was rebuttable, and that there was no evidence that he would not receive appropriate medical treatment. It was impossible to see how the introduction of the statutory assumption could have infringed the appellant's Convention rights.
Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 109 - European Convention on Human Rights Arts 3 and 5
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.