header-logo header-logo

04 October 2007
Issue: 7291 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

SENTENCING

R v Xhelollari [2007] EWCA Crim 2052

The imposition of a sentence of imprisonment for public protection was held to be wrong in principle, as the pre-sentence report did not identify factors which led to a conclusion that there was a significant risk of serious harm posed by the defendant.

The risk assessment of the report was based entirely upon the perceived vulnerability of the victim and the unwillingness of the appellant to acknowledge guilt. That is an inadequate basis on which to impose an indeterminate sentence on a necessary hypothesis that there is a significant risk of serious harm from future offending.

Such a conclusion must be founded upon evidence rather than speculation or mere apprehension of some risk of future harm.

The Sentencing Guidelines Council has published Dangerous Offenders: Guide for Sentencers and Practitioners (available on its web site: www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk).

It contains detailed guidance—including a summary of relevant case law—on the dangerous offender provisions in CJA 2003. Annex A contains useful flow charts for both adult offenders and young offenders.

Issue: 7291 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll