Turner, R. v

Turner, R. v

The reduction in credit for the guilty plea from 33% to 25% was justified because the appellant failed to plead guilty at the first reasonable opportunity by absenting himself from the PTPH; the 14-day Bail Act sentence should be made concurrent to avoid double counting.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Richard Turner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with minor modification
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Credit for Guilty Plea, Bail Act Offence, Double Counting
Criminal Law Sentencing Credit for Guilty Plea Bail Act Offence Double Counting

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Richard Turner

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was entitled to full credit for guilty plea
  2. 2 Whether the consecutive sentence for Bail Act offence amounted to double counting

Ratio Decidendi

The reduction in credit for the guilty plea from 33% to 25% was justified because the appellant failed to plead guilty at the first reasonable opportunity by absenting himself from the PTPH; the 14-day Bail Act sentence should be made concurrent to avoid double counting.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with minor modification

Orders

  • The 14-day term for the Bail Act offence is made concurrent, not consecutive.
  • Appeal against sentence otherwise dismissed.