MR, R. v

MR, R. v

Given the seriousness, premeditation, and public danger of the offences, and the applicant’s involvement in gang-related violence, the sentence was not manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle. The sentencing judge properly considered personal mitigation and the totality principle.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: MR
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
application for leave to appeal against sentence refused
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Totality Principle, Personal Mitigation, Youth Offenders, Dangerousness, Knife Crime, Firearms Offences
Criminal Law Sentencing Totality Principle Personal Mitigation Youth Offenders Dangerousness Knife Crime Firearms Offences

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

MR

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge failed to give sufficient weight to personal mitigation
  3. 3 Whether the totality principle was properly applied, particularly regarding consecutive sentences for imitation firearm offences

Ratio Decidendi

Given the seriousness, premeditation, and public danger of the offences, and the applicant’s involvement in gang-related violence, the sentence was not manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle. The sentencing judge properly considered personal mitigation and the totality principle.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

Orders

  • Renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence is refused.