Bannergee, R. v [2020] EWCA Crim 909 (19 May 2020)

Bannergee, R. v [2020] EWCA Crim 909 (19 May 2020)

The appellant was not entitled to a greater discount for his guilty plea because he did not make an unequivocal indication of a plea to the lesser offence at the earliest opportunity, and the late service of medical evidence did not bring him within the exceptions of the guideline. The judge correctly applied a 15% (actually 20%) discount for a late plea.

Citation
[2020] EWCA Crim 909
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Lee Michael Bannergee
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal refused
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm, Guilty Plea Discount
Criminal Law Sentencing Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm Guilty Plea Discount

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Lee Michael Bannergee

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge gave sufficient credit for the timing of the guilty plea under the Sentencing Council Guideline.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was not entitled to a greater discount for his guilty plea because he did not make an unequivocal indication of a plea to the lesser offence at the earliest opportunity, and the late service of medical evidence did not bring him within the exceptions of the guideline. The judge correctly applied a 15% (actually 20%) discount for a late plea.

Court Disposition

appeal refused

Orders

  • Sentence of sixteen months' imprisonment upheld
  • Victim surcharge order upheld