Goodings, R. v

Goodings, R. v

The judge erred in principle by sentencing the applicant on the basis of facts relevant to section 4, when the applicant had pleaded guilty only to the lesser offence under section 6. The sentence must reflect the actual offence of conviction, not the more serious charge that was not pursued.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Roderick Goodings
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; sentence varied
Legal Topics
Identity Documents, Sentencing, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Identity Documents Sentencing Appeal Procedure

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

Prosecution

Roderick Goodings

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred by considering irrelevant factors after the applicant pleaded guilty to a lesser offence under section 6 of the Identity Documents Act 2010 rather than section 4
  2. 2 What is the appropriate sentence for possession of another's identity document without reasonable excuse under section 6

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in principle by sentencing the applicant on the basis of facts relevant to section 4, when the applicant had pleaded guilty only to the lesser offence under section 6. The sentence must reflect the actual offence of conviction, not the more serious charge that was not pursued.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; sentence varied

Orders

  • Original sentence of six months' imprisonment quashed
  • Substituted sentence of two months' imprisonment imposed