The court examined the provisions distinguishing between sentences of imprisonment for life and imprisonment for public protection (IPP) in cases involving very serious gun and drugs crimes.
Held: The Avis case guidelines remained valuable, but this case involved the large scale importation and distribution of firearms and new statutory provisions. The references to indeterminate sentences in that case referred to different sentencing provisions. IPP may be imposed following conviction for any specified offence which would otherwise carry a maximum sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment. Therefore one of its distinguishing features is that it permits a defendant’s incarceration to extend beyond what would otherwise be the lawful maximum for the offence. However the availability of this sentence is also subject to restrictive conditions which do not apply to discretionary life imprisonment.
The sentences for importation of guns should be no less than for the importation of drugs.
Lord Judge CJ said: ‘The gravity of gun crime cannot be exaggerated. Guns kill and maim, terrorise and intimidate. That is why criminals want them: that is why they use them: and that is why they organise their importation and manufacture, supply and distribution. Sentencing courts must address the fact that too many lethal weapons are too readily available: too many are carried: too many are used, always with devastating effect on individual victims and with insidious corrosive impact on the wellbeing of the local community.
The purposes of sentencing are identified in section 142 of the 2003 Act. None of these purposes is pre-eminent. All apply to every case, but as a matter of sentencing reality, whenever a gun is made available for use as well as when a gun is used public protection is the paramount consideration. Deterrent and punitive sentences are required and should be imposed.’
Judges:
Lord Judge CJ
Citations:
[2009] EWCA Crim 1925, Times 11-Oct-2009, [2010] 1 Cr App R (S) 100
Links:
Statutes:
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Avis, T and others CACD 16-Dec-1997
The court set out the sentencing considerations for firearms offences in the light of an increase of the use of guns.
Held: The level of sentencing had not sufficiently reflected the gravity of such offences. After the 1994 Act, earlier . .
Cited – Regina v Kehoe CACD 8-Apr-2008
The defendant appealed against the imposition of a life sentence with a minimum of four and a half years imprisonment through section 225.
Held: A finding under section 225 would lead to adequate protection against the defendant, and the . .
Cited – Stannard and C and Others, Regina v; Attorney-General’s Reference (No 55 of 2008) CACD 26-Nov-2008
The court considered appeals all relating to the application of legislation regarding the imposition of sentences for public protection.
Held: Before imposing such a sentence, the court should consider all the alternative ways of providing . .
Cited – Regina v Stephens CACD 2007
The court considered the circumstances required for the imposition of a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection, and said that a life sentence would only be appropriate if the case was one of the very limited number in which a discretionary . .
Cited – Pedley, Martin and Hamadi v Regina CACD 14-May-2009
The court considered the justification for extended sentences of imprisonment for public protection: ‘Its justification is the protection of the public. It is indeterminate. Release depends on the judgment of the Parole Board as to the risk which . .
Cited – Stannard and C and Others, Regina v; Attorney-General’s Reference (No 55 of 2008) CACD 26-Nov-2008
The court considered appeals all relating to the application of legislation regarding the imposition of sentences for public protection.
Held: Before imposing such a sentence, the court should consider all the alternative ways of providing . .
Cited by:
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference No 48 and 49 of 2010 CACD 20-Oct-2010
The AG argued that the sentences imposed for conspiracy to possess and distribute prohibited firearms and ammunition, and conspiracy to convert into firearms. They had been produced to sell to drugs dealers to pay of drugs debts. The Crown argued . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.375739