Folkes, R v

Folkes, R v

The seriousness of the robbery did not justify a life sentence under section 225(2); the correct sentence was imprisonment for public protection under section 225(3).

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Applicant: Andre Folkes
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Robbery, Sentencing, Imprisonment for Public Protection, Life Imprisonment, Mental Health and Criminal Responsibility
Criminal Law Robbery Sentencing Imprisonment for Public Protection Life Imprisonment Mental Health and Criminal Responsibility

Case Brief

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Andre Folkes

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of life imprisonment under section 225(2) Criminal Justice Act 2003 was appropriate
  2. 2 Whether the seriousness of the offence justified a life sentence or a sentence of imprisonment for public protection

Ratio Decidendi

The seriousness of the robbery did not justify a life sentence under section 225(2); the correct sentence was imprisonment for public protection under section 225(3).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted, limited to the question of sentence type
  • Life sentence set aside