R v Harwood

R v Harwood

The judge was entitled to find the applicant dangerous and impose an extended sentence based on the severity of the offence, the risk of serious harm, and the aggravating factors. The sentence was not excessive or wrong in principle, and there was no justification for an extension of time to appeal.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Peter Harwood
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Attempted Murder, Sentencing, Dangerousness, Extended Sentence, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors
Criminal Law Attempted Murder Sentencing Dangerousness Extended Sentence Aggravating and Mitigating Factors

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Peter Harwood

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was excessive or wrong in principle
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in finding the applicant dangerous and imposing an extended sentence
  3. 3 Whether the judge properly applied the sentencing guidelines and considered aggravating/mitigating factors

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find the applicant dangerous and impose an extended sentence based on the severity of the offence, the risk of serious harm, and the aggravating factors. The sentence was not excessive or wrong in principle, and there was no justification for an extension of time to appeal.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Refusal of extension of time to appeal against sentence
  • Refusal of leave to appeal