R v Jordell Solomon

R v Jordell Solomon

The overall sentence was not manifestly excessive given the seriousness and aggravating features of the offences, and the judge properly applied the totality principle and considered the applicant's mitigation and mental health. However, jurisdictional errors in the form of the sentencing orders required correction to reflect the applicant's age at conviction and the correct statutory provisions.

Parties
Prosecutor: Rex; Applicant: Jordell Solomon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted only to correct jurisdictional errors; otherwise refused.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Attempted Robbery, Handling Stolen Goods, Having an Offensive Weapon, Attempted Grievous Bodily Harm, Damaging Property, Escape From Lawful Custody, Sentencing, Dangerousness, Mental Health in Sentencing
Criminal Law Robbery Attempted Robbery Handling Stolen Goods Having an Offensive Weapon Attempted Grievous Bodily Harm Damaging Property Escape From Lawful Custody +3 more

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecutor

Jordell Solomon

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to give adequate weight to personal mitigation
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to apply the Sentencing offenders with mental disorders Guideline

Ratio Decidendi

The overall sentence was not manifestly excessive given the seriousness and aggravating features of the offences, and the judge properly applied the totality principle and considered the applicant's mitigation and mental health. However, jurisdictional errors in the form of the sentencing orders required correction to reflect the applicant's age at conviction and the correct statutory provisions.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted only to correct jurisdictional errors; otherwise refused.

Orders

  • Quash order revoking Youth Rehabilitation Order and order for no separate penalty.
  • Quash sentence of imprisonment on count 13 of first indictment and substitute extended sentence of detention under section 254 of the Sentencing Act 2020 (custodial term 4 years, extended licence 2 years).