Stevens, R. v [2007] EWCA Crim 1128 (17 April 2007)

Stevens, R. v [2007] EWCA Crim 1128 (17 April 2007)

The sentence of eight months' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive given the appellant's persistent offending, flagrant breaches of court orders, and Parliament's intention to protect the public from ongoing nuisance; the sentence did not breach the European Convention on Human Rights.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Crim 1128
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Cyril John Stevens
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Anti Social Behaviour Order, Sentencing, European Convention on Human Rights, Persistent Offending
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Breach of Anti Social Behaviour Order Sentencing European Convention on Human Rights Persistent Offending

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Cyril John Stevens

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of eight months' imprisonment for breach of Anti-Social Behaviour Order was disproportionate
  2. 2 Whether adequate reduction was given for guilty plea
  3. 3 Whether imprisonment of an alcoholic without regard to his disease constitutes cruel and inhuman treatment under the European Convention on Human Rights

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence of eight months' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive given the appellant's persistent offending, flagrant breaches of court orders, and Parliament's intention to protect the public from ongoing nuisance; the sentence did not breach the European Convention on Human Rights.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Sentence of eight months' imprisonment upheld
  • 90 days spent on remand to count towards sentence