Singh v R

Singh v R

The sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive given the nature of the offending and the need for deterrence, but the appellant was entitled to a full one-third discount for his guilty plea due to flawed legal advice.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Amarjit Singh; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Sentencing, Parental Responsibility
Criminal Law Family Law Child Abduction Sentencing Parental Responsibility

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amarjit Singh

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for child abduction was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the appellant should have received a greater discount for his guilty plea

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive given the nature of the offending and the need for deterrence, but the appellant was entitled to a full one-third discount for his guilty plea due to flawed legal advice.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The sentence of 3 years and 4 months' imprisonment is quashed and substituted with a sentence of 3 years' imprisonment.