Regina v Bottomley: CACD 1985

Albeit an offender who commits a robbery or other offence while carrying a firearm must normally expect a consecutive sentence for the offence of carrying that firearm, ‘No doubt the sentencer is entitled in his discretion to follow the course of imposing concurrent sentences provided of course that the gravity of the criminal conduct of carrying a firearm in the commission of an offence is properly reflected in the principal sentence.’


Steyn J


[1985] 7 Cr App R (S) 355


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAttorney General’s Reference No 88 of 2002 (Hahn and Webster) CACD 7-Nov-2003
The Attorney General referred the sentences as too lenient for armed robbery, and aggravated vehicle taking. The defendants worked as a team, and used an imitation firearm, and threatened a victim with it.
Held: The possession of firearms . .
ApprovedRegina v McGrath CACD 1986
Whilst s.17(2) and Schedule 6 of the Firearms Act 1968 do not on their true construction require the imposition of a consecutive sentence for possession of a firearm in the course of committing an offence listed in Schedule 2, it should be the norm . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187753