AS, R. v

AS, R. v

Serious ill health or terminal illness may justify exceptional reduction in sentence, but only in rare cases where imprisonment is significantly harder for the offender than for others, and the interests of justice require it. Fresh medical evidence showing deterioration may be admitted, but the balance between personal mitigation and public interest in punishment must be maintained.

Parties
Appellant: AS; Appellant: SM; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
AS's appeal dismissed; SM's appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Mitigation, Serious Ill Health, Compassionate Release, Sexual Offences, Rape
Criminal Law Sentencing Mitigation Serious Ill Health Compassionate Release Sexual Offences Rape

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AS

Appellant

SM

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether serious ill health or terminal illness justifies suspension or reduction of custodial sentences
  2. 2 Whether fresh medical evidence post-sentencing can be admitted to vary sentence
  3. 3 Application of Bernard principles to sentencing of seriously ill or elderly offenders

Ratio Decidendi

Serious ill health or terminal illness may justify exceptional reduction in sentence, but only in rare cases where imprisonment is significantly harder for the offender than for others, and the interests of justice require it. Fresh medical evidence showing deterioration may be admitted, but the balance between personal mitigation and public interest in punishment must be maintained.

Court Disposition

AS's appeal dismissed; SM's appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • AS's sentence of 20 months' imprisonment upheld; no suspension
  • SM's sentence of 9 years' imprisonment quashed and substituted with 5 years' imprisonment