Mays, R. v

Mays, R. v

The trial judge was entitled to select a 15-year starting point, apply aggravating factors, and impose a 25-year minimum term; the sentence was not unduly lenient as the judge could not be sure to the criminal standard that the murder involved sexual or sadistic conduct.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Regina; Respondent: Shane Lee Mays
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Reference by Attorney General Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988 Challenging Sentence as Unduly Lenient
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Unduly Lenient Sentence, Minimum Term, Aggravating Factors
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Unduly Lenient Sentence Minimum Term Aggravating Factors

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Applicant

Shane Lee Mays

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Reference by Attorney General Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988 Challenging Sentence as Unduly Lenient

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the minimum term of 25 years for murder was unduly lenient
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in not categorising the murder as involving sexual or sadistic conduct under Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Code

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to select a 15-year starting point, apply aggravating factors, and impose a 25-year minimum term; the sentence was not unduly lenient as the judge could not be sure to the criminal standard that the murder involved sexual or sadistic conduct.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to refer sentence as unduly lenient is refused.