S & Ors, R v

S & Ors, R v

The sentences imposed on the appellants were excessive in light of the actual criminality admitted, the proper application of sentencing guidelines, and the need to reflect guilty pleas and mitigation. The appropriate sentences are reduced accordingly.

Parties
First Appellant: S; Second Appellant: Mandip Sehra; Third Appellant: Mohammed Azam; Fourth Appellant: Mohammed Abdullahi; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
partially allowed
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, Conspiracy, Contempt of Court, Deception, False Accounting, Sentencing
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice Conspiracy Contempt of Court Deception False Accounting Sentencing

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S

First Appellant

Mandip Sehra

Second Appellant

Mohammed Azam

Third Appellant

Mohammed Abdullahi

Fourth Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed on the appellants were manifestly excessive or based on incorrect factual or legal premises
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge erred in considering the seriousness of the offences and the appropriate starting points for sentence
  3. 3 Whether the sentences properly reflected the pleas of guilty and mitigating factors

Ratio Decidendi

The sentences imposed on the appellants were excessive in light of the actual criminality admitted, the proper application of sentencing guidelines, and the need to reflect guilty pleas and mitigation. The appropriate sentences are reduced accordingly.

Court Disposition

partially allowed

Orders

  • First appellant's sentence reduced to ten years total imprisonment.
  • Second appellant's appeal dismissed; sentence of six years upheld.