Holland & Anor, R. v

Holland & Anor, R. v

There was sufficient material before the sentencing judge to justify the assessment of both appellants as dangerous and to impose extended sentences; the custodial element of two-and-a-half years was not manifestly excessive given their roles as principal offenders and the nature of the offence.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Neil Thomas Holland; Appellant: Michael Alan James
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Violent Disorder, Sentencing, Dangerousness Assessment, Extended Sentences
Criminal Law Violent Disorder Sentencing Dangerousness Assessment Extended Sentences

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Neil Thomas Holland

Appellant

Michael Alan James

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the custodial element of the extended sentence was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the assessment of dangerousness under section 229 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was correct

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient material before the sentencing judge to justify the assessment of both appellants as dangerous and to impose extended sentences; the custodial element of two-and-a-half years was not manifestly excessive given their roles as principal offenders and the nature of the offence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeals against sentence dismissed