Gray, R. v

Gray, R. v

The sentencing judge should have applied the guilty plea discount to the whole notional sentence, provided the resulting sentence did not fall below 80% of the statutory minimum; the sentence imposed was therefore quashed and substituted with a lower sentence in line with this principle.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Applicant: Robert Gray
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Burglary, Guilty Plea Discount, Statutory Minimum Sentences
Criminal Law Sentencing Burglary Guilty Plea Discount Statutory Minimum Sentences

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Robert Gray

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in applying the discount for a guilty plea under section 144 of the Criminal Justice Act 2005 to only part of the sentence rather than the whole notional sentence, subject to the statutory minimum.

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge should have applied the guilty plea discount to the whole notional sentence, provided the resulting sentence did not fall below 80% of the statutory minimum; the sentence imposed was therefore quashed and substituted with a lower sentence in line with this principle.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • sentence of three years and 229 days quashed
  • substituted sentence of 40 months' imprisonment for burglary