Attorney General's Reference No. 115 and 116 OF 2004

Attorney General's Reference No. 115 and 116 OF 2004

Although the sentences were lenient for the quantity of cannabis involved, the court declined to increase them due to the double jeopardy principle and the limited involvement of the offenders as per the agreed basis of plea.

Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: Christopher Hiscock; Respondent: Jeffrey Coombes
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Reference / Appeal
Outcome
reference dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Drug Offences, Basis of Plea, Double Jeopardy
Criminal Law Sentencing Drug Offences Basis of Plea Double Jeopardy

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 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Christopher Hiscock

Respondent

Jeffrey Coombes

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Reference / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed for possession of cannabis with intent to supply were unduly lenient
  2. 2 Whether the basis of plea accepted was appropriate given the facts

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentences were lenient for the quantity of cannabis involved, the court declined to increase them due to the double jeopardy principle and the limited involvement of the offenders as per the agreed basis of plea.

Court Disposition

reference dismissed

Orders

  • Leave granted to refer, but sentences not increased.