AG v Ross [2001] JRC 165 (27 July 2001)
- Citation
- [2001] JRC 165
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
More details
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The accused's peripheral involvement, good character, and first offender status justified a non-custodial penalty despite the general rule that street violence warrants custodial sentences.
Court disposition
non-custodial penalty imposed
Orders
- 240 hours of community service
- exclusion order for six months from pubs and nightclubs
02
Material facts
Parties
Ross
AccusedCrown Advocate
Prosecution Counsel: Crown AdvocateAmounts and remedies
- Community Service Hours: 240
- Exclusion Order Duration (months): 6
- Hypothetical Custodial Sentence (months): 18
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
appropriate sentencing for peripheral involvement in street violence
- 02
consideration of character and references in sentencing
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Ross was a first offender, had excellent references, and his conduct was out of character. He was not responsible for the serious injuries caused by co-accused who absconded.
- Respondent
- Street violence is unacceptable and generally warrants custodial sentences.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Court's reasoning
Street violence should generally be punished with custodial sentences.
- 02
Court's reasoning
Peripheral involvement and good character may justify a non-custodial penalty.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The accused's peripheral involvement, good character, and first offender status justified a non-custodial penalty despite the general rule that street violence warrants custodial sentences.
Obiter and limits
- The accused came very close to receiving a custodial sentence.
- The penalty imposed reflects the Court's satisfaction that the conduct was out of character.
Court disposition
non-custodial penalty imposed
- 240 hours of community service
- exclusion order for six months from pubs and nightclubs
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.
Court record
Judgment
JUDGMENT THE BAILIFF: 1. We agree with the Crown Advocate that street violence is quite unacceptable and generally should be punished with custodial sentences. In this case, however, the accused, we are satisfied, was on the periphery of the attack and was not responsible for the serious injuries suffered by the victim at the hands of the two co-accused who have absconded.
2. We have taken account of the excellent references supplied for the accused and the fact that he is a first offender.
3. Ross, you were 'steaming' drunk on that occasion and you behaved disgracefully in joining in the mêlée and kicking Mr. Roberts while he was on the ground. It is only because we are satisfied that this is out of character, so far as you are concerned, that we are going to impose a non-custodial penalty. We hope that you will appreciate how close you have come to a custodial sentence and that you will not ever again become involved in this kind of affair. Had we been going to impose a custodial sentence, we would have imposed one of 18 months' imprisonment. However, the Court orders you to perform 240 hours of community service. We also make an exclusion order for a period of six months, from today, excluding you from 1 st and 7 th category licensed premises, that is from pubs and nightclubs. Authorities Mallet -v-AG (14 th July 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/134] Page Last Updated: 11 Apr 2017 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
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.