| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2013] All ER (D) 105 (Jul) |
| Neutral Citation: | [2013] EWCA Crim 1159 |
| Court: | Court of Appeal, Criminal Division |
| Judge: | Keith J and the Recorder of Birmingham |
| Representation | Fayza Benlamkadem (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeal) for the defendant. |
| Judgment Dates: | 14 June 2013 |
Catchwords
Sentence - Suspended sentence - Period to be activated - Theft - Defendant being sentenced in respect of theft offences - Defendant appealing against sentence on basis judge erring in period activated - Whether sentence manifestly excessive.
The Case
Sentence Suspended sentence. The defendant was a professed bicycle thief. He appealed against sentences imposed by a judge on the basis of an alleged error made by the sentencing judge in activating a suspended sentence. In dismissing the appeal, the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that, on the facts, the judge had always had in mind activating half of the suspended sentence and a simple correction of the court record could remedy an error in respect of the period of the suspended sentence to be activated.
Practice Areas
Lexis®Library
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases