Jersey Judgment

AG v RR [2023] JRC 155 (22 August 2023)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Given the gravity and unprovoked nature of the assaults, Article 5(3) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 mandates a custodial sentence. The court largely followed the Crown's proposed durations but made a modest reduction to reflect positive signs of rehabilitation.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • 4 months youth detention for Count 1 (assault on Master X)
  • 9 months youth detention for Count 2 (grave and criminal assault on Master Y), concurrent
  • 9 months youth detention for Count 3 (grave and criminal assault on Master Z), concurrent
  • 15 months youth detention for Count 4 (grave and criminal assault on Master X), concurrent
  • 15 months youth detention for Count 5 (grave and criminal assault on male victim), concurrent
  • Total sentence: 15 months youth detention
  • Probation Order revoked with no separate penalty
  • Restraining orders for 2 years

02

Material facts

Parties

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Unnamed Accused

Defendant Counsel: Defence counsel

Amounts and remedies

  • Total Youth Detention Sentence: months 15
  • Restraining Order Duration: years 2

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Sentencing Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Crown submitted that the proposed durations for youth detention are appropriate given the appalling and unprovoked violence perpetrated by the accused.
Respondent
Defence counsel highlighted possible positive changes in the accused's behaviour, including calling an ambulance for a victim and engaging with a psychologist, suggesting potential for rehabilitation.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014

    Custodial sentence is mandatory where required by Article 5(3) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 for serious offences.

  2. 02

    General sentencing principles

    Sentencing should reflect both the seriousness of the offence and any mitigating factors indicating potential for rehabilitation.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Given the gravity and unprovoked nature of the assaults, Article 5(3) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 mandates a custodial sentence. The court largely followed the Crown's proposed durations but made a modest reduction to reflect positive signs of rehabilitation.

Obiter and limits

  • The court hopes the defendant will seek help from the Probation Service and change his life trajectory.
  • Support from the Probation Service will be forthcoming if sincerely requested by the defendant.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

  • 4 months youth detention for Count 1 (assault on Master X)
  • 9 months youth detention for Count 2 (grave and criminal assault on Master Y), concurrent
  • 9 months youth detention for Count 3 (grave and criminal assault on Master Z), concurrent
  • 15 months youth detention for Count 4 (grave and criminal assault on Master X), concurrent
  • 15 months youth detention for Count 5 (grave and criminal assault on male victim), concurrent
  • Total sentence: 15 months youth detention
  • Probation Order revoked with no separate penalty
  • Restraining orders for 2 years

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

[2023] JRC 155

JUDGMENT THE BAILIFF: 1. Because of the complexities of this matter, some of which have arisen during the course of submissions before us we will give full reasons on a later occasion.

2. In general terms however, we have seen on the one hand the most appalling and unprovoked violence on the streets of St Helier perpetrated by the accused in this case and we are satisfied that Article 5(3) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 applies and that this matter cannot be dealt with other than by a custodial sentence.

3. We are alive however, to what has been said to us by Defence counsel and the hints, and we put them no more strongly than that to a possible change in direction to the unhappy trajectory that has characterised this accused life to date. We note for example that he phoned the ambulance after the assault on the victim of Count 5 and we note what has been said about his engagement with the psychologist who has worked with him.

4. In our view, however, the sentences moved for by the Crown are entirely correct as to proposed duration and we are therefore going largely to follow them but we will reduce the conclusions to a modest extent to reflect what we take to be the positive signs and as a gesture to this Defendant that we hope that he will change his life and behave in a more pro social way. He will, we hope, ask the Probation Service as soon as he is able to do so for help and for support and we have little doubt that if asked sincerely that support will be forthcoming.

5. In connection with Count 1, the assault on Master X, 4 months youth detention. Count 2, grave and criminal assault on Master Y, 9 months' youth detention, concurrent. Count 3, grave and criminal assault on Master Z, 9 months' youth detention, concurrent. Count 4, grave and criminal assault on Master X, 15 months' youth detention, concurrent. Count 5, grave and criminal assault on the male victim, 15 months' youth detention, concurrent. We order that the Probation Order be revoked with no separate penalty to flow in that regard and this makes a total of 15 months' youth detention.

6. We also make the restraining orders in the terms sought before us for a period of 2 years. Authorities Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014. AG v Goncalves [2022] JRC 097 AG v Y [2022] JRC 002 AG v Cameron [2008] JLR Note 44 AG v Mendonca [2006] JRC 066 Harrison v AG [2004] JLR 111 AG v Nolan [2002] JLR Note 31 AG v Santos [2023] JRC 126 Page Last Updated: 07 Sep 2023 Back to top About JLIB Accessibility Contacts Disclaimer Feedback Privacy policy Site map © Jersey Legal Information Board 2001- 20262023 (External) 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.

AG v Goncalves [2022] JRC 097

Case cited

AG v Y [2022] JRC 002

Case cited

AG v Cameron [2008] JLR Note 44

Case cited

AG v Mendonca [2006] JRC 066

Case cited

Harrison v AG [2004] JLR 111

Case cited

AG v Nolan [2002] JLR Note 31

Case cited

AG v Santos [2023] JRC 126

Case cited

Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.