Neate, R. v

Neate, R. v

The sentencing judge was entitled to categorise the Sheffield robbery as category 1A due to serious psychological harm, properly applied the totality principle, and was justified in finding dangerousness without a pre-sentence report given the facts.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Thomas Neate
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence refused
Legal Topics
Robbery, Sentencing, Dangerousness, Totality Principle, Extended Sentence
Criminal Law Robbery Sentencing Dangerousness Totality Principle Extended Sentence

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Thomas Neate

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in categorising the Sheffield robbery as category 1A
  2. 2 Whether the totality principle was properly applied in sentencing
  3. 3 Whether the judge was wrong to conclude the applicant was dangerous without a pre-sentence report

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge was entitled to categorise the Sheffield robbery as category 1A due to serious psychological harm, properly applied the totality principle, and was justified in finding dangerousness without a pre-sentence report given the facts.

Court Disposition

renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence refused