Regina v Sullivan; Regina v Gibbs; Regina v Elener; Regina v Elener: CACD 8 Jul 2004

The appellants, each convicted of murder, challenged the minimum periods of detention ordered to be served.
Held: As to the starting point for sentencing, judges should have regard to the published practice directions, and not the letter from the Lord Chief Justice of 31 December 2003, which became a practice direction in 2004. As to Sullivan, the applicable starting point under previous practice was 14 years, and the judge had correctly limited his sentence to that period. As to Gibbs, the earlier minimum would have been 14 years, and his sentence was reduced accordingly. As to the Eleners, father and son, their crimes manfestly justified the starting point of thirty years.


Mr Justice Astill Lord Justice Judge The Lord Chief Justice Of England &Amp; Wales The Honourable Mr Justice Gross Deputy Chief Justice Of England And Wales


[2004] EWCA Crim 1762, Times 17-Jul-2004, [2005] Cr App R (S) 308


Bailii, Bailii


Criminal Justice Act 2003 269(5)


England and Wales


CitedConsolidated Practice Direction LCJ 2002
The court gave general guidance on criminal practice. As to voluntary bills of indictment, to protect defendants: ‘save where there are good grounds for doing otherwise – (1) They must receive notice of an application for a Voluntary Bill with . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Anderson HL 25-Nov-2002
The appellant had been convicted of double murder. The judge imposed a mandatory life sentence with a minimum recommended term. The Home Secretary had later increased the minimum term under the 1997 Act. The appellant challenged that increase.
CitedPractice Statement (Crime: Life sentences) LCJ 31-May-2002
The statement followed the report of the Sentencing Advisory Panel of March 15, 2002. The statement contained guidance, not firm rules. The phrase ‘minimum term’ should replace the term ‘tariff’. Offenders are normally not released on the expiry of . .

Cited by:

DistinguishedUttley, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 30-Jul-2004
In 1995 the defendant was sentenced to twelve years for rapes committed in 1983. He complained that the consequences of the later sentence were adverse because of the 1991 Act. He would now serve three quarters of the sentence rather than two . .
CitedLast and others v Regina; Attorney General’s Reference No 108 of 2004 CACD 25-Jan-2005
Appeals were heard on the application of new sentencing guidelines to the defendant’s cases retrospectively. They had pleaded guilty to murders, and the issues was as to the minimum terms set.
Held: The judge had to set the minimum term in . .
CitedRegina v Hare, Regina v Sullivan CACD 9-Dec-2004
The defendants appealed their convictions, saying that counsel had been inhibited by the judge from presenting their cases properly.
Held: The judge had shown a distinct lack of courtesy to the counsel representing one defendant, without any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198596