Barber R. v

Barber R. v

Imprisonment for public protection was not necessary as the appellant did not present a significant risk of serious harm; a determinate sentence of 4 years is appropriate given the nature and number of offences, previous offending, and aggravating features.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Peter John Barber
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
sentence of imprisonment for public protection quashed; substituted with determinate sentence
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Indecent Images, Imprisonment for Public Protection, Dangerousness, Sexual Offences
Criminal Law Sentencing Indecent Images Imprisonment for Public Protection Dangerousness Sexual 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Peter John Barber

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of imprisonment for public protection was lawful and appropriate
  2. 2 Whether a determinate sentence should be imposed instead
  3. 3 Assessment of risk of serious harm and dangerousness

Ratio Decidendi

Imprisonment for public protection was not necessary as the appellant did not present a significant risk of serious harm; a determinate sentence of 4 years is appropriate given the nature and number of offences, previous offending, and aggravating features.

Court Disposition

sentence of imprisonment for public protection quashed; substituted with determinate sentence

Orders

  • Determinate term of 4 years imprisonment substituted
  • 90 days served to be deducted