The Court gave detailed guidelines on sentencing for offences of rape, following a report from the sentencing advisory panel.
Held: The court outlined the base sentences for single and multiple offences of rape, listing aggravating and mitigating factors, and dealing specifically with date rape, acquaintance rape, male rape, and anal rape. The base sentence should be 5 years, or 8 for more serious offences, with 15 years for repeat offences, and life imprisonment is appropriate where the offender was likely to remain a threat.
Judges:
Lord Justice Rose, Mrs Justice Hallett, Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales -Lord Woolf Lord Justice Rose And Lord Justice Judge
Citations:
Times 11-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Crim 2891, [2003] 1 WLR 546, [2003] 1 Cr App R 396, [2003] Crim LR 207, [2003] 2 Cr App R(S) 31, [2003] 2 All ER 939, [2003] 1 Cr App R 25
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Attorney General v CCE, NJK and TAG; Attorney General’s References (Nos 91, 119, 120 of 2002) CACD 21-Jan-2003
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 . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 37, 38, 44, 45, 51, 53, 35, 40, 43, 45, 41 and 42 of 2003) CACD 23-Oct-2003
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 . .
Cited – Regina v Webb, Attorney General’s Reference (No 52 of 2003) CACD 9-Dec-2003
The reference was for an unduly lenient sentence for offences of gross indecency with a child and attempted rape.
Held: Even experienced judges could be unaware of guideline cases. In this case Millberry and the Reference 91 etc of 2002 would . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference v Nos. 31, 45, 43, 42, 50 and 51 of 2003; Regina v McInerney; Regina v McLean CACD 16-Jul-2004
The court considered appeals by the Attorney-General against sentences considered to be too lenient, and in particular where a community penalty had been imposed rather than a sentence of immediate imprisonment.
Held: The Court emphasised the . .
Cited – Regina v Garvey, Attorney-General’s Reference (No 104 of 2004) CACD 25-Oct-2004
The Attorney General appealed the sentence of 18 months imposed on the defendant for sexual assault by a digital penetration.
Held: The maximum sentences for the offence had been increased to life imprisonment, and accordingly sentence levels . .
Cited – Regina v Wisniewski CACD 9-Dec-2004
The defendant appealed sentences for battery with iintent to commit sexual assault.
Held: In general the existing authorities on sentencing of sex offenders should apply to the new offences, with an allowance made for the lower maximum . .
Cited – Regina v Corran, Regina v Cutler, Regina v Heard, Regina v Willams CACD 2-Feb-2005
Various sentences were appealed in respect of defendants convicted of sexual offences under the 2003 Act.
Held: The Act contained new extended ranges of sexual offences, and these required resvised sentencing guidelines. The starting point for . .
Cited – French and Webster, Regina v (Attorney General’s Reference No 14 and No 15 of 2006) CACD 8-Jun-2006
The defendant had been convicted of repeatedly raping a 12 week old girl, and other sexual offences against young girls. After pleading guilty, the judge had passed a life sentence setting the minimum term at six years which was lower because of the . .
Cited – Regina v Lloyd (BP) CACD 28-Feb-2007
The defendant appealed his sentence for the rape of a child under 13.
Held: In setting the sentence, the judge had referred to consultation guidelines issued by the Sentencing Guidelines Council. The applicable guide case was Millberry until . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178357
