Roche, R. v

Roche, R. v

The judge was entitled to conclude the appellant was dangerous and impose imprisonment for public protection, but the minimum period should have been two-and-a-half years, not three, based on proper application of mitigation and guidelines.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Nathan Roche
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Robbery, Possession of a Bladed Article, Sentencing, Imprisonment for Public Protection, Dangerousness Assessment
Criminal Law Robbery Possession of a Bladed Article Sentencing Imprisonment for Public Protection Dangerousness Assessment

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Nathan Roche

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was properly found dangerous under the relevant Act
  2. 2 Whether the minimum period for imprisonment for public protection was correctly determined
  3. 3 Whether the sentencing judge departed from guidelines without justification

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to conclude the appellant was dangerous and impose imprisonment for public protection, but the minimum period should have been two-and-a-half years, not three, based on proper application of mitigation and guidelines.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Minimum period for imprisonment for public protection reduced to two-and-a-half years
  • Time spent on remand to count towards sentence