UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

October 25, 2018

Following the appellant’s retrial for sexual offences, the judge had been correct to impose a special sentence of custody for offenders of particular concern. However, the term imposed, namely a custodial term of 16 years and an extended licence period of one year, contravened the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 Sch.2 para.2(1) because it was “of greater severity” than the 17-year sentence imposed at the original trial. That was because of the release regime applicable to offenders who were subject to a special sentence of custody for offenders of particular concern.

INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN OFFENDERS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 RELEASE FROM CUSTODY RETRIALS SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

February 17, 2015

An application for a writ of habeas corpus by a prisoner who had been sentenced to imprisonment for public protection when his offence pre-dated the coming into force of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 failed. The sentencing judge had had competent jurisdiction to direct both imprisonment and a minimum term. Her order could not, therefore, be ignored as a suspected nullity; it had to be obeyed unless and until it was set aside on appeal.

ABSENCE OF JURISDICTION CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 Pt 12 s.225 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE HABEAS CORPUS IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.80 PRISON GOVERNORS RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 RELEASE ON LICENCE s.225 s.85 SENTENCING UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

December 5, 2014

A sentence of imprisonment for public protection, which had been unlawfully imposed following an offender’s guilty pleas to two offences of indecent assault committed before the Criminal Justice Act 2003 Pt 12 s.225 came into force, was quashed and replaced by an extended sentence.

CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 (COMMENCEMENT NO.8 AND TRANSITIONAL AND SAVING PROVISIONS) ORDER 2005 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 Pt 12 s.225 DANGEROUS OFFENDERS EXTENDED SENTENCES IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION INDECENT ASSAULT PENOLOGY AND CRIMINOLOGY POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.85 Pt 7 s.225 Sch.37 Pt 7 SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1956 s.14(1) SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

October 30, 2014

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

July 9, 2013

A victim surcharge order imposed against the appellant was unlawful as his offences had been committed prior to October 1, 2012, when an order could only be imposed if the defendant was sentenced to a fine, which was not the case with the appellant.

2012 CHANGE OF NAME CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FINES FRAUD NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS OFFENCES COMMITTED PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1 SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.91 UNLAWFUL ORDER UNLAWFUL SENTENCES VICTIMS SURCHARGE

September 27, 2012

Although imprisonment for public protection was a sentence of last resort, it was appropriate where there was nothing to say that the risk posed by a dangerous defendant would be significantly reduced by the time of the projected release date from a determinate or extended sentence.

ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 DANGEROUSNESS IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION NO EVIDENCE THAT RISK POSED BY OFFENDER WOULD BE REDUCED BY RELEASE DATE RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 SENTENCING UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

July 6, 2012

When sentencing an offender for making and distributing indecent images of children, a judge had been entitled to take a high starting point above the sentencing guidelines to reflect the scale, gravity and grotesqueness of the material before him. However, extended sentences relating to possession of such images had to be corrected as they exceeded the maximum sentences allowable.

CORRECTIONS TO POSSESSION SENTENCES WHERE ABOVE MAXIMUM SENTENCES ALLOWED CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1988 s.160 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND IMMIGRATION ACT 2008 s.63(7) DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES GRAVITY AND SCALE OF MATERIAL HIGH STARTING POINT ABOVE SENTENCING GUIDELINES INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES SENTENCING UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

February 14, 2005

There was no power to add an extended sentence to a detention and training order under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.85 .

ADDITION OF EXTENDED PERIOD OF LICENCE TO DETENTION AND TRAINING ORDERS CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1991 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1991 s.39(2) DETENTION AND TRAINING ORDERS EXTENDED LICENCE PERIODS EXTENDED SENTENCES EXTENSION PERIODS INDECENCY INDECENCY WITH A CHILD INDECENCY WITH CHILD POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.85 s.101 s.101(5) S.101(5) POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.102 s.103 s.103(1) s.105 s.106 s.33 s.39 S.39(2) CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1991 s.43(3) s.44(3) s.76 S.85 POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.85(1) s.85(1)(b) s.85(2) s.85(5) s.91 SENTENCING SENTENCING POWERS SEXUAL OFFENCES UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

UNLAWFUL SENTENCES

Contact Stephen