The defendant having been convicted of sex and other offences, had been sentenced to six years imprisonment for public protection. Working as an aerial and satellite dish installer, whilst working at an elderly lady’s house, he had first drugged her and then sexually assaulted her.
Held: The extraordinary nature of the attack entirely supported the judge’s conclusions. However, ‘For the assault, we think that the appropriate determinate sentence would have been one of nine years. On the other hand, we could not criticise the notional term of seven years selected by the judge in respect of administering the drugs. In the result, the minimum term will be 54 months (less 91 days served on remand). That is a reduction of 18 months and to that extent only this appeal succeeds.’
Elias LJ, Eady J, Recorder of Liverpool
[2012] EWCA Crim 1222
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Lang and Others, Regina v CACD 3-Nov-2005
In each case the defendant had commited violent or sexual offences and were caught by the new mandatory sentencing provisions, and been made subject to life imprisonment, or detention for public protection, or an extended sentence.
Held: The . .
Distinguished – Xhelollari, Regina v CACD 12-Jul-2007
Standing alone, a refusal by a convicted first-time sex offender to admit his guilt could warrant a finding of dangerousness. . .
Cited – Pedley, Martin and Hamadi v Regina CACD 14-May-2009
The court considered the justification for extended sentences of imprisonment for public protection: ‘Its justification is the protection of the public. It is indeterminate. Release depends on the judgment of the Parole Board as to the risk which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.459868