Perks, R v [2000] EWCA Crim 34 (19th April, 2000)

Perks, R v [2000] EWCA Crim 34 (19th April, 2000)

The sentence of four years was excessive given the mitigation and absence of aggravating factors such as use of a weapon, blows, or threats. Proper procedure regarding victim impact statements was not followed; only admissible evidence should inform sentencing. The appeal was allowed and the sentence reduced to three years.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Crim 34
Parties
Appellant: James Benjamin Perks; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Victim Impact Statements, Robbery
Criminal Law Sentencing Victim Impact Statements Robbery

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Benjamin Perks

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for robbery was appropriate given the circumstances and mitigation
  2. 2 Proper use and disclosure of victim impact statements in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence of four years was excessive given the mitigation and absence of aggravating factors such as use of a weapon, blows, or threats. Proper procedure regarding victim impact statements was not followed; only admissible evidence should inform sentencing. The appeal was allowed and the sentence reduced to three years.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Sentence of four years imprisonment quashed
  • Substituted sentence of three years imprisonment