Sparkes, R v

Sparkes, R v

It was unjust in the circumstances to impose consecutive three-year sentences for the 2010 offences; the totality principle required a total sentence of six and a half years' imprisonment, and the sentences for the 2010 offences should be reduced to 18 months each, served concurrently but consecutive to the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Kevin David Sparkes
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Burglary, Theft, Sentencing, Totality Principle, Mandatory Minimum Sentence
Criminal Law Burglary Theft Sentencing Totality Principle Mandatory Minimum Sentence

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Kevin David Sparkes

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the consecutive sentences imposed breached the totality principle
  2. 2 Whether it was unjust to impose the mandatory minimum sentence consecutively given the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

It was unjust in the circumstances to impose consecutive three-year sentences for the 2010 offences; the totality principle required a total sentence of six and a half years' imprisonment, and the sentences for the 2010 offences should be reduced to 18 months each, served concurrently but consecutive to the five-year sentence imposed in June 2010.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentences of three years' imprisonment for the 2010 offences substituted with sentences of 18 months' imprisonment, to be served concurrently with each other but consecutive to the five-year sentence imposed on 14th June 2010.