The defendant had been sentenced to 8 years for robbery. Two days after being sentenced he attacked a prison officer. He pleaded guilty to wounding with intent. The Recorder of Liverpool sentenced him to life imprisonment, as he was obliged to do and specified that: ‘the part to be served by reference to the period the appellant would have had to serve if the Recorder had imposed seven years’ imprisonment consecutive, as he would have done but for section 2 [automatic life sentence].’ The Recorder started with a term of 15 years and halved it and then reduced that period by the time spent in custody on remand.
Held: The court was correct to make the sentence consecutive: ‘In our judgment the Recorder took a logical and obviously sensible step . . This result is in no way unjust to the appellant who on any showing deserves a measure of punishment for this serious offence, and who clearly presents a continuing risk of danger to the public. We consider that the course which the Recorder adopted promotes the public policy underlying the Act and it furthermore avoided the obvious anomaly which would have arisen had the submissions of counsel been accepted.’
Judges:
Lord Bingham LCJ
Citations:
[2000] 2 Cr App R (S) 418
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Szczerba CACD 6-Feb-2002
The defendant appealed against sentence following conviction for burglary and false imprisonment. He had received sentences of 8 years and life respectively, with a determinate period of 11 years, and an earliest release of 6 years. The sentences . .
Cited – O’Brien, Harris, Moss, Llewellyn and others v Regina CACD 14-Jul-2006
In each case the court was asked whether a sentence imposed under section 225(2) of the 2003 CJA for the protection of the public could be made to run consecutively to the principle sentence for the offence, and how did this link in with the courts . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.244792
