Attorney General's Reference No. 113 of 2004 v Under Section 36 Of

Attorney General's Reference No. 113 of 2004 v Under Section 36 Of

Although the sentence was lenient, it was not unduly so given the early guilty plea, genuine remorse, and the principle of double jeopardy. The court declined to interfere with the sentence imposed.

Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent/offender: Dean John Follows
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (attorney General's Reference) / Judgment on Reference for Unduly Lenient Sentence
Outcome
Application dismissed; sentence upheld
Legal Topics
Robbery, Sentencing, Unduly Lenient Sentence, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors
Criminal Law Robbery Sentencing Unduly Lenient Sentence Aggravating and Mitigating Factors

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Dean John Follows

Respondent/offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (attorney General's Reference) / Judgment on Reference for Unduly Lenient Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for robbery and related offences was unduly lenient under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentence was lenient, it was not unduly so given the early guilty plea, genuine remorse, and the principle of double jeopardy. The court declined to interfere with the sentence imposed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; sentence upheld

Orders

  • Sentence imposed in the Crown Court remains unchanged