White, R. v [2007] EWCA Crim 1141 (02 May 2007)

White, R. v [2007] EWCA Crim 1141 (02 May 2007)

It would be unreasonable to conclude that there is a significant risk to the public of serious harm from the commission by the appellant of further specified offences; a determinate sentence of eight years is sufficient to protect the public.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Crim 1141
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Paul White
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Manslaughter, Sentencing, Imprisonment for Public Protection, Dangerousness Assessment
Criminal Law Manslaughter 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Paul White

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of imprisonment for public protection was appropriate
  2. 2 Whether the length of the determinate sentence was excessive

Ratio Decidendi

It would be unreasonable to conclude that there is a significant risk to the public of serious harm from the commission by the appellant of further specified offences; a determinate sentence of eight years is sufficient to protect the public.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentence of imprisonment for public protection quashed
  • Determinate sentence of eight years imposed