Nouri & Anor, R v

Nouri & Anor, R v

There was insufficient evidence to justify the finding of dangerousness required for IPP; the offences, while serious and aggravated, did not demonstrate a significant risk of further serious offending absent prior history or pattern, so IPP was not appropriate and should be replaced by a determinate sentence.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Rezgar Sharif Nouri; Appellant: Mohammed Ibrahim
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Rape, Sentencing, Imprisonment for Public Protection, Dangerousness Assessment, Sentencing Guidelines
Criminal Law Rape Sentencing Imprisonment for Public Protection Dangerousness Assessment Sentencing Guidelines

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Rezgar Sharif Nouri

Appellant

Mohammed Ibrahim

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the imposition of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) was justified
  2. 2 Whether the notional determinate sentence was manifestly excessive
  3. 3 Whether Ibrahim should have received more than 25% credit for his guilty plea

Ratio Decidendi

There was insufficient evidence to justify the finding of dangerousness required for IPP; the offences, while serious and aggravated, did not demonstrate a significant risk of further serious offending absent prior history or pattern, so IPP was not appropriate and should be replaced by a determinate sentence.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • IPP sentence quashed
  • Appellants to serve 12 years imprisonment with 25% credit for guilty pleas