Jersey Judgment

AG - Oeillet 31-Mar-2006 [2006] JRC 053 (31 March 2006)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Given the high risk of re-offending, lack of compliance with supervision, and the defendant's criminal record, consecutive and concurrent sentences were imposed in accordance with the totality principle.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • 3 months' imprisonment on First Indictment
  • 18 months' imprisonment on Second Indictment, consecutive to First Indictment
  • 12 months' imprisonment for breaking and entering and larceny, concurrent with other breach of probation counts and with Second Indictment, but consecutive to First Indictment
  • 12 months' imprisonment for taking and driving away, concurrent as above
  • 12 months' imprisonment for driving without insurance, concurrent as above
  • total of 21 months' imprisonment
  • all other outstanding orders discharged

02

Material facts

Amounts and remedies

  • Total Imprisonment Term: 21

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Sentencing

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
No arguments from applicant recorded.
Respondent
No arguments from respondent recorded.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    common law

    Totality principle in sentencing

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Given the high risk of re-offending, lack of compliance with supervision, and the defendant's criminal record, consecutive and concurrent sentences were imposed in accordance with the totality principle.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

  • 3 months' imprisonment on First Indictment
  • 18 months' imprisonment on Second Indictment, consecutive to First Indictment
  • 12 months' imprisonment for breaking and entering and larceny, concurrent with other breach of probation counts and with Second Indictment, but consecutive to First Indictment
  • 12 months' imprisonment for taking and driving away, concurrent as above
  • 12 months' imprisonment for driving without insurance, concurrent as above
  • total of 21 months' imprisonment
  • all other outstanding orders discharged

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2006] JRC 053

JUDGMENT THE COMMISSIONER: 1. [beginning not recorded}....disturbing. You are assessed as being at a high risk of re-offending. Although the Probation Report is as constructive as it can possibly be there is in our view little hope of your willingness to comply with supervision.

2. You have a completely relaxed view to authority, and your criminal record speaks for itself. We are going to follow the conclusions of the Crown.

3. On the First Indictment you will serve 3 months' imprisonment, on the Second Indictment, 18 months' imprisonment, that is consecutive, and for the breach of probation each count runs concurrently with the other and we have in mind the totality principle concurrent with the Second Indictment, but consecutive with the First Indictment. So breaking and entering and larceny, 12 months' imprisonment, taking and driving away, 12 months' imprisonment; driving without insurance, 12 months' imprisonment; that is a total of 21 months' imprisonment, and the only person to blame is yourself. All the other outstanding orders are discharged. No Authorities Page Last Updated: 10 Jun 2015 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.