A sentencing judge had no jurisdiction to vary a sentence once the time period in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.155 had expired. The case of R. v Saville (Peter Davies) [1981] Q.B. 12 provided no authority to the contrary.
A sentencing judge had no jurisdiction to vary a sentence once the time period in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.155 had expired. The case of R. v Saville (Peter Davies) [1981] Q.B. 12 provided no authority to the contrary.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES DANGEROUSNESS EXPIRY OF 56-DAY TIME LIMIT UNDER S.155 POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 EXTENDED SENTENCES POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.155 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SENTENCING POWERS UNLAWFUL SENTENCES VARIATION OF SENTENCE
The Northern Ireland Court of Appeal reiterated the approach set out in R. v McKeown (Gary) [2013] NICA 28, namely that although assistance might be derived from the aggravating and mitigating features identified by the England and Wales Sentencing Guidelines Council in its definitive guidance, judges and practitioners in Northern Ireland were not constrained by those guidelines.
ATTEMPTS CORONERS AND JUSTICE ACT 2009 s.125(1) DOMESTIC BURGLARY NORTHERN IRELAND SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL OFFENCES
A total sentence of four-and-a-half years’ imprisonment imposed on an offender following his conviction for a number of sexual offences committed against his stepdaughter over a five-year period was unduly lenient. The sentence was increased to seven years’ imprisonment.
ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION INDECENT ASSAULT SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1956 s.14 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.9 TOTALITY OF SENTENCE UNDUE LENIENCY
In passing sentence for sexual assault, a judge had been entitled to take an adjusted starting point of six years’ imprisonment, as opposed to one of 12 months as recommended in the sentencing guidelines. The offence had been replete with aggravating factors and, save for a guilty plea, devoid of any mitigation. The judge had correctly observed that the guidelines were precisely such: guidelines, not tram lines.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES JUDGE TAKING STARTING POINT ABOVE THAT RECOMMENDED IN SENTENCING GUIDELINES NUMEROUS AGGRAVATING FACTORS WITH ONLY GUILTY PLEA IN MITIGATION OFFENDER ASSAULTING WOMAN IN TOILET CUBICLE PERSISTENT OFFENDERS SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ASSAULT STARTING POINT
Sentences totalling 16 months’ imprisonment were unduly lenient, having been imposed following an offender’s guilty pleas to 15 counts of causing or inciting, or attempting to incite, children to engage in sexual activity where the offender had contacted up to 220 children via Facebook. A sentence of four years was appropriate.
CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN OFFENDER CONTACTING CHILDREN VIA FACEBOOK AND INCITING SEXUAL ACTS ON CAMERA s.101 s.81 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.8 SOCIAL MEDIA UNDUE LENIENCY
A sentence of three-and-a-half years’ imprisonment imposed following an offender’s conviction for kidnapping a 10-year-old child and inciting her to engage in sexual activity was not unduly lenient given the circumstances, which did not fit within the sentencing guidelines and included a relatively short duration kidnap and the fact that no sexual activity had taken place.
BUT NO ACTUAL CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CHILD ABDUCTION CHILD SEX OFFENCES COMMITTING AN OFFENCE WITH INTENT TO COMMIT A SEXUAL OFFENCE KIDNAPPING NON-APPLICABILITY OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ACTIVITY SHORT-DURATION KIDNAPPING OF 10-YEAR-OLD CHILD AND INCITEMENT TO ENGAGE IN UNDUE LENIENCY
A discretionary life sentence imposed under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 for assault on a child under 13 by penetration was not excessive. The offender was a predatory paedophile with previous convictions for sexual offences against children and the offence was of sufficient seriousness to warrant life imprisonment.
ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION CHILD SEX OFFENCES DANGEROUS OFFENDERS DISCRETIONARY LIFE IMPRISONMENT DISCRETIONARY LIFE SENTENCE OFFENCES OCCURRING IN 2004/2005 POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.76 s.82(2)(b) s.85 s.91 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENCE SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENCE AND DANGEROUSNESS OF OFFENDER SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13
A sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment imposed for 12 counts of committing indecent assault was reduced to 12 years in the light of the maximum sentence for each offence, the sentencing guidelines, the offender’s age and disability, and the fact that for a historic offence he would serve two-thirds of his sentence in custody.
“HISTORIC” OFFENCES ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST FAMILIAL CHILD SEX OFFENCES INDECENT ASSAULT MAXIMUM SENTENCES SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SENTENCING UNDER PRE-CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 LAW SEXUAL OFFENCES TOTALITY OF SENTENCE TOTALITY OF SENTENCE IN LIGHT OF MAXIMUM SENTENCE FOR EACH OFFENCE
A total sentence of five years’ imprisonment imposed for two sexual assaults was manifestly excessive and was reduced to three years. The judge had been entitled to find that the aggravating features moved the offences out of the third category in the definitive guideline for sexual assault, but he had erred in passing a sentence on one count which was at the starting point of the first category.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 Pt 12 s.225 DANGEROUS OFFENDER PROVISIONS NOT APPLICABLE DANGEROUS OFFENDERS JUDGE ERRING IN CALCULATION OF SENTENCE WITH REGARD TO AGGRAVATING FEATURES Pt 12 s.227 s.225 s.227 s.240 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ASSAULT
The court quashed a sentence of 14 months’ imprisonment imposed after an offender’s guilty plea to outraging public decency by taking video footage underneath women’s skirts without their knowledge. A community order with a requirement to attend a sex offender programme was more likely to lead to the offender’s rehabilitation than a custodial sentence and would therefore best serve the interests of the public.
COMMUNITY ORDERS OUTRAGING PUBLIC DECENCY PHOTOGRAPHS PROSPECTS OF REHABILITATION REHABILITATION SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL OFFENCES SUPERVISION REQUIREMENTS TAKING FOOTAGE UNDERNEATH WOMEN’S SKIRTS WITHOUT CONSENT VOYEURISM WHETHER CUSTODIAL SENTENCE APPROPRIATE
Please use the form below to make contact. Your email will be responded to promptly (we endeavour to respond to all email enquiries within one hour). Alternatively, you can call Stephen's firm, Twelve Tabulae Limited, on +44 (0) 203 846 5801.