Clarke & Ors, R v

Clarke & Ors, R v

The sentences imposed were not unduly lenient as they fell within the range of sentences a reasonable judge could impose, considering the offenders' youth, immaturity, mitigation, and the circumstances of the offences. The judge was not required to apply the aggravated burglary guideline to the perverting the course of justice offence. The sentence for Andrews was not manifestly excessive, and there was no objectionable disparity.

Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent/offender: Morgan Clarke; Respondent/offender: Declan Andrews; Respondent/offender: Anton Craig Thompson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal/reference / Application for Leave to Refer Sentence as Unduly Lenient and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Applications refused
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Unduly Lenient Sentences, Youth Offenders, Kidnapping, Blackmail, Perverting the Course of Justice, Attempted Robbery, Possession of Offensive Weapon, Theft
Criminal Law Sentencing Unduly Lenient Sentences Youth Offenders Kidnapping Blackmail Perverting the Course of Justice Attempted Robbery +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Morgan Clarke

Respondent/offender

Declan Andrews

Respondent/offender

Anton Craig Thompson

Respondent/offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal/reference / Application for Leave to Refer Sentence as Unduly Lenient and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed on Clarke, Thompson, and Andrews were unduly lenient
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed on Andrews was manifestly excessive
  3. 3 Appropriate application of youth and immaturity in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The sentences imposed were not unduly lenient as they fell within the range of sentences a reasonable judge could impose, considering the offenders' youth, immaturity, mitigation, and the circumstances of the offences. The judge was not required to apply the aggravated burglary guideline to the perverting the course of justice offence. The sentence for Andrews was not manifestly excessive, and there was no objectionable disparity.

Court Disposition

Applications refused

Orders

  • Leave to refer sentences as unduly lenient refused
  • Leave to appeal against sentence refused