1999/189 - AG v Scannell [1999] UR 189 (26 October 1999)

1999/189 - AG v Scannell [1999] UR 189 (26 October 1999)

Because the appellant was unrepresented and not invited to seek representation, and new mitigating factors were presented on appeal, the court imposed the minimum mandatory period of disqualification and adjusted the fines accordingly.

Citation
[1999] UR 189
Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
26 October 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Driving Under the Influence, Driving Without Insurance, Sentencing, Right to Representation
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Driving Under the Influence Driving Without Insurance Sentencing Right to Representation

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's lack of representation affected the fairness of the trial
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed by the Magistrate should be varied in light of new evidence and circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

Because the appellant was unrepresented and not invited to seek representation, and new mitigating factors were presented on appeal, the court imposed the minimum mandatory period of disqualification and adjusted the fines accordingly.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Minimum mandatory period of disqualification of 12 months imposed
  • Fine of £500 or 14 days imprisonment in default under Article 16(A)