Attorney General's Reference No. 93 OF 2005

Attorney General's Reference No. 93 OF 2005

The original deferred sentence was unduly lenient given the scale and commercial nature of the offences; despite significant mitigation, a custodial sentence of 21 months was appropriate, taking into account double jeopardy and compliance with previous court orders.

Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Offender: Leonard Michael Shobbrook
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Reference / Reference by Attorney General Under Section 36 Criminal Justice Act 1988; Sentence Review
Outcome
Sentence increased to 21 months' imprisonment; offender to surrender to custody immediately.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Drug Offences, Unduly Lenient Sentences, Deferred Sentences
Criminal Law Sentencing Drug Offences Unduly Lenient Sentences Deferred Sentences

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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Leonard Michael Shobbrook

Offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal Reference / Reference by Attorney General Under Section 36 Criminal Justice Act 1988; Sentence Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original deferred sentence for production and supply of cannabis was unduly lenient
  2. 2 What the appropriate sentence should be given the facts and mitigating/aggravating factors

Ratio Decidendi

The original deferred sentence was unduly lenient given the scale and commercial nature of the offences; despite significant mitigation, a custodial sentence of 21 months was appropriate, taking into account double jeopardy and compliance with previous court orders.

Court Disposition

Sentence increased to 21 months' imprisonment; offender to surrender to custody immediately.

Orders

  • Sentence of 21 months' imprisonment imposed, starting from the date of judgment.
  • Confiscation hearing postponed until 5th December 2005.