M, R. v

M, R. v

A section 91 order was appropriate due to the appellant's persistent offending, breach of previous orders, and aggravating features, but his extreme youth warranted a reduction in the sentence from three years to 27 months.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Robbery, Sentencing of Juveniles, Section 91 Powers of Criminal Courts (sentencing) Act 2000
Criminal Law Robbery Sentencing of Juveniles Section 91 Powers of Criminal Courts (sentencing) Act 2000

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

M

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of three years' detention under section 91 was appropriate for a 15-year-old appellant convicted of robbery and attempted robbery
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge properly applied the Sentencing Guidelines Council's guidance for young offenders

Ratio Decidendi

A section 91 order was appropriate due to the appellant's persistent offending, breach of previous orders, and aggravating features, but his extreme youth warranted a reduction in the sentence from three years to 27 months.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentences of three years under section 91 quashed and substituted with sentences of 27 months under section 91.