The defendant had been convicted of seven offences of making indecent images of children, having downloaded pictures from the Internet. He appealed an indeterminate order banning him from using any computer capable of connection to the Internet.
Held: The indeterminate nature of the order was not objectonable, since the defendant would be able to apply to court to vary the order. The order was too wide however in that it was part of normal working life to have to use the internet. It would not apply so as to prevent him using the Internet for the purposes of his work.
Judges:
Rose LJ, Grigson, Andrew Smith JJ
Citations:
Times 07-Jun-2004, [2004] Crim LR 757, [2004] EWCA Crim 1664, [2005] 1 Cr App R(S) 34
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199539
