Lay, R v

Lay, R v

Consecutive extended sentences under section 85 should be avoided; a determinate sentence may properly be followed by a consecutive section 85 extended sentence, provided totality is observed and the statutory maximum is not exceeded. The sentence was varied to reflect this sequencing without altering the overall...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Andrew Lay; Respondent: Regina (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Reference by Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
Appeal allowed to the extent of varying the sequence of sentences.
Legal Topics
Extended Sentences, Consecutive Sentences, Sexual Offences, Licence Periods
Criminal Law Sentencing Extended Sentences Consecutive Sentences Sexual Offences Licence Periods

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Lay

Appellant

Regina (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Reference by Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether consecutive extended sentences under section 85 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 are appropriate
  2. 2 How to aggregate custodial and extension periods within statutory maximums
  3. 3 Proper sequencing of determinate and extended sentences

Ratio Decidendi

Consecutive extended sentences under section 85 should be avoided; a determinate sentence may properly be followed by a consecutive section 85 extended sentence, provided totality is observed and the statutory maximum is not exceeded. The sentence was varied to reflect this sequencing without altering the overall custodial and extension periods.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed to the extent of varying the sequence of sentences.

Orders

  • Sentences of two years on the second indictment to be served first.
  • Sentences on the first indictment, including extended sentences, to be served consecutively after the second indictment.