Roddy, R. v

Roddy, R. v

A flagrant contempt of court requires a deterrent sentence, but the aims of punishment can be achieved by a lower sentence when the breach is admitted at the first reasonable opportunity; a sentence of 15 months is appropriate.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Appellant: Peter Roddy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Breach of Restraining Order, Sentencing Principles, Totality, Credit for Guilty Plea
Criminal Law Contempt of Court Breach of Restraining Order Sentencing Principles Totality Credit for Guilty Plea

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 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Peter Roddy

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence for contempt of court was excessive
  2. 2 Whether adequate credit was given for the guilty plea
  3. 3 Whether the principle of totality was properly applied

Ratio Decidendi

A flagrant contempt of court requires a deterrent sentence, but the aims of punishment can be achieved by a lower sentence when the breach is admitted at the first reasonable opportunity; a sentence of 15 months is appropriate.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • sentence of 20 months' imprisonment quashed
  • sentence of 15 months' imprisonment substituted