Nobes, R. v

Nobes, R. v

It was unreasonable to conclude that the appellant presented a significant risk to the public of serious harm from further offences; the imposition of imprisonment for public protection was manifestly excessive and wrong in principle given the isolated nature of the offences, progress in rehabilitation, and the pre-sentence report's assessment.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: David Allan Keith Nobes
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Manslaughter, Sentencing, Dangerousness, Imprisonment for Public Protection
Criminal Law Manslaughter Sentencing Dangerousness Imprisonment for Public Protection

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

David Allan Keith Nobes

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the imposition of imprisonment for public protection under section 225 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was manifestly excessive or wrong in principle
  2. 2 Whether the assumption of dangerousness under section 229 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

It was unreasonable to conclude that the appellant presented a significant risk to the public of serious harm from further offences; the imposition of imprisonment for public protection was manifestly excessive and wrong in principle given the isolated nature of the offences, progress in rehabilitation, and the pre-sentence report's assessment.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • sentence of imprisonment for public protection quashed
  • determinate sentence of three years imposed