Bowers & Ors, R. v

Bowers & Ors, R. v

The appellants could not have a legitimate expectation that an irregular and unorthodox sentence indication would be binding; the sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive and properly reflected the seriousness and scale of the criminality, and the principle of totality was appropriately applied.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Anthony Bowers; Appellant: Lewis Nicholl; Appellant: Martin Bowers; Appellant: Joseph Ashman; Appellant: Jonathan Michael Turner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Sentencing, Legitimate Expectation, Procedure for Sentence Indication, Principle of Totality
Criminal Law Conspiracy Sentencing Legitimate Expectation Procedure for Sentence Indication Principle of Totality

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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Anthony Bowers

Appellant

Lewis Nicholl

Appellant

Martin Bowers

Appellant

Joseph Ashman

Appellant

Jonathan Michael Turner

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the judge was bound by an informal sentence indication allegedly given through court staff
  3. 3 Whether the principle of totality was properly applied

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants could not have a legitimate expectation that an irregular and unorthodox sentence indication would be binding; the sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive and properly reflected the seriousness and scale of the criminality, and the principle of totality was appropriately applied.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed