Fadipe, R. v

Fadipe, R. v

The sentencing judge's assessment of dangerousness was not erroneous, but the notional determinate term was excessive; the appropriate starting point should have been seven years and six months, resulting in a minimum term of three years and nine months, less time spent on remand.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Michael Fadipe
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Firearms Offences, Sentencing, Dangerousness Assessment, Youth Offenders
Criminal Law Firearms Offences Sentencing Dangerousness Assessment Youth Offenders

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Michael Fadipe

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding the appellant dangerous
  2. 2 Whether the notional determinate term was excessive given the appellant's age and circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's assessment of dangerousness was not erroneous, but the notional determinate term was excessive; the appropriate starting point should have been seven years and six months, resulting in a minimum term of three years and nine months, less time spent on remand.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Minimum specified term reduced to three years and nine months, less 238 days spent on remand