Stott, R v
The sentencing judge was entitled to find the appellant dangerous and impose an extended sentence, given repeated serious sexual offending against vulnerable young girls, persistent offending while on bail, and evidence of significant risk of serious harm; the sentence on count 9 was unlawful as it exceeded the statutory maximum and was reduced accordingly.
- Parties
- Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Shane Michael Stott
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 24 February 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Dangerousness, Extended Sentence, Young Offenders, Totality Principle
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Prosecution
Shane Michael Stott
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the extended sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
- 2 Whether the appellant should have been found dangerous
- 3 Whether the sentencing judge gave sufficient weight to youth, immaturity, and intellectual limitations
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge was entitled to find the appellant dangerous and impose an extended sentence, given repeated serious sexual offending against vulnerable young girls, persistent offending while on bail, and evidence of significant risk of serious harm; the sentence on count 9 was unlawful as it exceeded the statutory maximum and was reduced accordingly.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part
Orders
- Sentence of eight months' detention on count 9 quashed and substituted with four months' detention
- Sentence on count 9 to run consecutively to counts 5 and 8, concurrently with count 2
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment