Wolstenholme, R v

Wolstenholme, R v

The order of consecutive sentences must be structured so that the lesser sentence (under twelve months) comes first to prevent prejudice to the defendant's eligibility for home detention curfew.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Tyler Wolstenholme
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Home Detention Curfew, Consecutive Sentences, Statutory Interpretation
Criminal Law Sentencing Home Detention Curfew Consecutive Sentences Statutory Interpretation

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Tyler Wolstenholme

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order of consecutive sentences affects eligibility for home detention curfew under the Criminal Justice Act 1991 and 2003
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was prejudiced by the order in which sentences were imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The order of consecutive sentences must be structured so that the lesser sentence (under twelve months) comes first to prevent prejudice to the defendant's eligibility for home detention curfew.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Order of sentences reversed: three months' detention to come first, eighteen months' detention to come second.