Lunkov, R. v

Lunkov, R. v

The imposition of an indeterminate sentence for public protection was justified due to the significant risk posed by the appellant, but the minimum term should be reduced from 5 years to 4 years to reflect his age, lack of previous convictions, and early guilty pleas.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Lunkov
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Indeterminate Detention, Public Protection, Dangerousness Provisions, Minimum Term Calculation
Criminal Law Sentencing Indeterminate Detention Public Protection Dangerousness Provisions Minimum Term Calculation

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Lunkov

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the imposition of an indeterminate sentence for public protection was appropriate
  2. 2 Whether the minimum term imposed was excessive
  3. 3 Whether the sentencing procedure was compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The imposition of an indeterminate sentence for public protection was justified due to the significant risk posed by the appellant, but the minimum term should be reduced from 5 years to 4 years to reflect his age, lack of previous convictions, and early guilty pleas.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentence of indeterminate detention for public protection upheld
  • Minimum term reduced from 5 years to 4 years