Attorney General's Reference No. 20 of 2005

Attorney General's Reference No. 20 of 2005

The court held that, although the sentence was lenient, the sentencing judge had sufficient material to justify an exceptional course due to the offender's age, lack of criminal record, remorse, and circumstances, and thus the court would not interfere with the sentence.

Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: Michael Anthony May
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentence Review
Outcome
leave to refer granted, but sentence not interfered with
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Drug Offences, Community Penalty, Custodial Sentence, Exceptional Circumstances
Criminal Law Sentencing Drug Offences Community Penalty Custodial Sentence Exceptional Circumstances

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Michael Anthony May

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentence Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for supplying Class A drugs was unduly lenient
  2. 2 Whether exceptional circumstances justified a non-custodial sentence

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, although the sentence was lenient, the sentencing judge had sufficient material to justify an exceptional course due to the offender's age, lack of criminal record, remorse, and circumstances, and thus the court would not interfere with the sentence.

Court Disposition

leave to refer granted, but sentence not interfered with

Orders

  • sentence stands