Sentencing guidelines - Personal Mitigating Circumstances – Exceptional Circumstances

8 results

02 February 2024

The King v Fionnghuale Mary Theresa Dympha Marie Nuala Perry

The Court of Appeal sets out best sentencing practice in terrorism cases with reference to the new statutory sentencing regime at paragraphs [33] – [36].

Appeal against a sentence of four years imprisonment and 12 month licence period – collecting or making a record of information likely to be useful to a terrorist – whether sentence manifestly excessive – whether the sentence was a product of an error of law relating to the new sentencing regime – article 7 ECHR – new approach applied by sentencing judge – one year licence period applied by operation of law rather than any judicial decision or act – no error of law – court reemphasised where a deterrent sentence is required personal mitigation carries little weight – appeal dismissed

[2024] NICA 11 McCloskey LJ

10 November 2023

The King v Francis Devlin

Renewed application for leave to appeal a sentence of four years’ imprisonment – four counts of conspiracy to cheat the public revenue – sole issue of impact of imprisonment on applicant’s son – whether sentence should be suspended – Court of Appeal approved the application of the guidance in R v Petherick [2012] EWCA Crim 2214 in NI – circumstances not so exceptional to merit a suspension – public interest in deterrence – appeal dismissed

[2023] NICA 71 Keegan LCJ

24 February 2023

King v Qing Wen Lin, Long Quang Lin Lin Zheng, Zhu Lin & Yang Wu Chen

Renewed application for leave to appeal sentence – money laundering operation – Proceeds of Crime Act 2022 – whether sentences manifestly excessive – applications to receive new material granted – principle of mercy applied to two mothers - Article 8 ECHR – the offender’s personal circumstances - judge erred in confining exceptional circumstances to the offending itself - disparity in sentencing – deterrent sentences – culpability – the aggravating factors contained highly prejudicial assertions not agreed or proven – prosecution portrayal of the roles and knowledge attributed to the appellants was inconsistent - roles/rankings which the judge attributed to certain appellants were neither agreed nor proven - leave granted – appeals allowed - sentences reduced.

Guidance in relation to the following sentencing principles can be found at paragraphs [86] – [110] - mercy in sentencing, Article 8 ECHR to include reference to R v Petherick [2013] 1 WLR 1102, exceptional circumstances, the offender’s personal circumstances, disparity in sentencing, deterrent sentences and culpability.

[2023] NICA 11 McCloskey LJ

06 December 2019

Queen v Daniel Raymond Dunlop

appeal against sentence - supply of a Class A and Class B drugs (cocaine) contrary to section 4(3)(b) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 - substantial criminal record of 61 previous convictions, three relate to possession of drugs (cannabis) - delay - approach adopted and weight accorded by the sentencing judge to the factor of the appellant’s rehabilitation were erroneous in law - appeal allowed

[2019] NICA 72 McCloskey LJ

24 February 2006

Gary McDonald, John Keith McDonald and Stephen Gary Maternaghan, Attorney General's Reference (Number 1 of 2006) (AG REF 11-13 of 2005)

Guilty pleas - need to plead at earliest opportunity.

[2006] NICA 4 Kerr LCJ

28 June 1993

Attorney General's Reference (No.2 of 1993)

Thirty month imprisonment for offence of burglary - elderly victim - suspended sentence - exceptional mitigating circumstances - whether unduly lenient.

[1993] 5 NIJB 71 Hutton LCJ

21 November 1991

R v Raymond Gerard Quigg

Making property available for use in connection with terrorism - whether sentence of 10 years manifestly excessive - weight given to the physical condition and personal history of the appellant.

[1991] 9 NIJB 38 Hutton LCJ

04 October 1991

R v Ivan Frederick Houston

Robbery of bank with imitation firearm - exceptional personal circumstance of appellant based on fact - ex police officer who had been subject to two terrorist attacks and had turned to alcohol.

R v Houston 041091 Hutton LCJ