’11.. . . in a case concerning the commission of a series of offences motivated by drug addiction, where the probation service recommend a drug treatment and testing order, the sentencing judge has to make an assessment. Ultimately he is exercising his discretion by reference to all the circumstances of the case. In this case His Honour Judge Selwood carefully considered the recommendation for a drug treatment and testing order. He noted that he had to do a balancing act. In doing that balancing act, the judge took into account the circumstances of the offences and the material revealed by the drug treatment and testing order assessment report. The judge then came to the conclusion that the proper course in this case was to impose a substantial term of imprisonment rather than a drug treatment and testing order.
12. Although we accept that the appellant’s motive for his offending was to feed a drug addiction, that does not compel the conclusion that a proper sentence in the case is a drug treatment and testing order. It seem to us that it must be a matter for the judge’s discretion whether such an order is an appropriate disposal in the instant case. We do not consider that there is any material upon which we should say that the judge erred in the exercise of his discretion or that he came to a decision which was wrong in principle. The judge had regard to the seriousness of the offences before him. He was entitled to do so.’
Judges:
Woiolfe LCJ, Jackson J
Citations:
[2003] EWCA Crim 239
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Belli CACD 20-Oct-2003
The defendant, a drug addict, had been arrested and released on bail for a series of offences. He appealed against a sentence of two years and nine months. The court rejected a suggestion that he might be made the subject of a Drug Treatment and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.187012
